Literature DB >> 16307632

Health services research in the privacy age.

Rachel Hess1, Karen Matthews, Melissa McNeil, ChungChou H Chang, Wishwa Kapoor, Cindy Bryce.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Strengthened regulations concerning privacy of health information are affecting large-scale health outcomes research.
OBJECTIVE: To create a data collection system that would facilitate outcomes research, avoid selection bias, and fulfill obligations to protect privacy.
DESIGN: We created a web-based system that uses touch-screen computer technology for longitudinal collection of data. The system provides access to information in deidentified form, enables it to be linked to health services and outcomes data, and allows patients to join a research registry project (RRP) and be placed on a prospective subject list (PSL). PARTICIPANTS, MEASUREMENTS, AND
RESULTS: Pilot testing in 86 consecutive patients who were seen at a large, urban, university-based general medicine practice and had a mean age of 50 years showed that 81 patients had no difficulty, 5 had some difficulty, and none had considerable difficulty using the computer technology to complete a health survey. No patients refused to complete the survey and all patients completed the entire survey. Forty-seven (55%) joined the RRP and 42 of these 47 (89%) joined the PSL. RRP participants were less likely than RRP nonparticipants to be divorced or widowed (P=.03) and less likely to have hypertension (P=.03) but had no other significant differences in sociodemographic or clinical characteristics. PSL participants did not differ from PSL nonparticipants.
CONCLUSIONS: The new system ensures privacy and appears to facilitate research recruitment and avoid selection bias.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16307632      PMCID: PMC1490264          DOI: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.0227.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gen Intern Med        ISSN: 0884-8734            Impact factor:   5.128


  8 in total

Review 1.  The RAND-36 measure of health-related quality of life.

Authors:  R D Hays; L S Morales
Journal:  Ann Med       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 4.709

2.  Standards for privacy of individually identifiable health information. Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, DHHS. Proposed rule.

Authors: 
Journal:  Fed Regist       Date:  1999-11-03

Review 3.  Global registries for measuring pharmacoeconomic and quality-of-life outcomes: focus on design and data collection, analysis and interpretation.

Authors:  Lisa Kennedy; Ann-Marie Craig
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 4.  A real-time tracking, notification, and web-based enrollment system for emergency department research.

Authors:  James Quinn; Kris Durski
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 3.451

5.  Electronic collection of health-related quality of life data: validity, time benefits, and patient preference.

Authors:  B D Bliven; S E Kaufman; J A Spertus
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  Selection bias from requiring patients to give consent to examine data for health services research.

Authors:  S H Woolf; S F Rothemich; R E Johnson; D W Marsland
Journal:  Arch Fam Med       Date:  2000 Nov-Dec

7.  Educational attainment and behavioral and biologic risk factors for coronary heart disease in middle-aged women.

Authors:  K A Matthews; S F Kelsey; E N Meilahn; L H Kuller; R R Wing
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1989-06       Impact factor: 4.897

8.  Inflammatory biomarkers, hormone replacement therapy, and incident coronary heart disease: prospective analysis from the Women's Health Initiative observational study.

Authors:  Aruna D Pradhan; JoAnn E Manson; Jacques E Rossouw; David S Siscovick; Charles P Mouton; Nader Rifai; Robert B Wallace; Rebecca D Jackson; Mary B Pettinger; Paul M Ridker
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2002-08-28       Impact factor: 56.272

  8 in total
  6 in total

Review 1.  Role of health information technologies in the Patient-centered Medical Home.

Authors:  Jennifer L Kraschnewski; Robert A Gabbay
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2013-09-01

2.  Promoting safe prescribing in primary care with a contraceptive vital sign: a cluster-randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Eleanor Bimla Schwarz; Sara M Parisi; Sanithia L Williams; Grant J Shevchik; Rachel Hess
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2012 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 5.166

3.  A randomized controlled pilot trial of the functional assessment screening tablet to engage patients at the point of care.

Authors:  Rachel Hess; Hilary Tindle; Molly B Conroy; Sunday Clark; Eric Yablonsky; Ron D Hays
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2014-08-08       Impact factor: 5.128

4.  Patient difficulty using tablet computers to screen in primary care.

Authors:  Rachel Hess; Aimee Santucci; Kathleen McTigue; Gary Fischer; Wishwa Kapoor
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 5.128

5.  Patterns of response to patient-centered decision support through a personal health record.

Authors:  Rachel Hess; Gary S Fischer; Sarah M Sullivan; XinXin Dong; Melissa Weimer; Caroline Zeith; Sunday Clark; Mark S Roberts
Journal:  Telemed J E Health       Date:  2014-09-22       Impact factor: 3.536

6.  Racial comparisons of diabetes care and intermediate outcomes in a patient-centered medical home.

Authors:  Joseph A Simonetti; Michael J Fine; Yi-Fan Chen; Deborah Simak; Rachel Hess
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2013-11-19       Impact factor: 19.112

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.