Literature DB >> 17470509

Legal and ethical considerations in processing patient-identifiable data without patient consent: lessons learnt from developing a disease register.

Charlotte L Haynes1, Gary A Cook, Michael A Jones.   

Abstract

The legal requirements and justifications for collecting patient-identifiable data without patient consent were examined. The impetus for this arose from legal and ethical issues raised during the development of a population-based disease register. Numerous commentaries and case studies have been discussing the impact of the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA1998) and Caldicott principles of good practice on the uses of personal data. But uncertainty still remains about the legal requirements for processing patient-identifiable data without patient consent for research purposes. This is largely owing to ignorance, or misunderstandings of the implications of the common law duty of confidentiality and section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2001. The common law duty of confidentiality states that patient-identifiable data should not be provided to third parties, regardless of compliance with the DPA1998. It is an obligation derived from case law, and is open to interpretation. Compliance with section 60 ensures that collection of patient-identifiable data without patient consent is lawful despite the duty of confidentiality. Fears regarding the duty of confidentiality have resulted in a common misconception that section 60 must be complied with. Although this is not the case, section 60 support does provide the most secure basis in law for collecting such data. Using our own experience in developing a disease register as a backdrop, this article will clarify the procedures, risks and potential costs of applying for section 60 support.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17470509      PMCID: PMC2598125          DOI: 10.1136/jme.2006.016907

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Ethics        ISSN: 0306-6800            Impact factor:   2.903


  9 in total

1.  Data protection and patients' consent. Informed consent should be sought before data are used by registries.

Authors:  J I Morrow
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-03-03

2.  Using patient-identifiable data for observational research and audit.

Authors:  R Al-Shahi; C Warlow
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-10-28

3.  Data protection legislation: interpretation and barriers to research.

Authors:  J Strobl; E Cave; T Walley
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-10-07

4.  Consent, confidentiality, and the threat to public health surveillance.

Authors:  Chris Verity; Angus Nicoll
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-05-18

5.  Common sense and common consent in communicable disease surveillance.

Authors:  L Turnberg
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 2.903

6.  Legal issues of data anonymisation in research.

Authors:  Petra Wilson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-05-29

7.  Consent, confidentiality, and the Data Protection Act.

Authors:  Amy Iversen; Kathleen Liddell; Nicola Fear; Matthew Hotopf; Simon Wessely
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2006-01-21

8.  Public attitudes towards the use of primary care patient record data in medical research without consent: a qualitative study.

Authors:  M R Robling; K Hood; H Houston; R Pill; J Fay; H M Evans
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 2.903

9.  Confidentiality and the duties of care.

Authors:  J O'Brien; C Chantler
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 2.903

  9 in total
  9 in total

1.  Conducting record review studies in clinical practice.

Authors:  Siddharth Sarkar; Divya Seshadri
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2014-09-20

Review 2.  Augmented and virtual reality in surgery-the digital surgical environment: applications, limitations and legal pitfalls.

Authors:  Wee Sim Khor; Benjamin Baker; Kavit Amin; Adrian Chan; Ketan Patel; Jason Wong
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2016-12

3.  Sorry, You Can't Have That Information: Data Holder Confusion Regarding Privacy Requirements for Personal Health Information and the Potential Chilling Effect on Health Research.

Authors:  Daryl Pullman; Sharon K Buehler; Larry Felt; Katherine Gallagher; Jeannie House; T Montgomery Keough; Lucy McDonald; Angela Power; Ann Ryan
Journal:  Healthc Policy       Date:  2009-05

4.  Modern use of smartphone applications in the perioperative management in microsurgical breast reconstruction.

Authors:  Nakul Gamanlal Patel; Warren Matthew Rozen; Daniel Marsh; Whitney T H Chow; Tobias Vickers; Lubna Khan; George S Miller; David J Hunter-Smith; Venkat V Ramakrishnan
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2016-04

5.  Sharing with More Caring: Coordinating and Improving the Ethical Governance of Data and Biomaterials Obtained from Children.

Authors:  Holly Longstaff; Vera Khramova; Elodie Portales-Casamar; Judy Illes
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-07-01       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Checking Questionable Entry of Personally Identifiable Information Encrypted by One-Way Hash Transformation.

Authors:  Xianlai Chen; Yang C Fann; Matthew McAuliffe; David Vismer; Rong Yang
Journal:  JMIR Med Inform       Date:  2017-02-17

7.  Public Attitudes Regarding Trade-offs Between the Functional Aspects of a Contact-Confirming App for COVID-19 Infection Control and the Benefits to Individuals and Public Health: Cross-sectional Survey.

Authors:  Seiji Bito; Yachie Hayashi; Takanori Fujita; Shigeto Yonemura
Journal:  JMIR Form Res       Date:  2022-07-20

8.  Health promotion services for lifestyle development within a UK hospital--Patients' experiences and views.

Authors:  Charlotte L Haynes
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2008-08-13       Impact factor: 3.295

9.  Validation and reliability of a smartphone application for the International Prostate Symptom Score questionnaire: a randomized repeated measures crossover study.

Authors:  Jae Heon Kim; Soon-Sun Kwon; Sung Ryul Shim; Hwa Yeon Sun; Young Myoung Ko; Dong-Il Chun; Won Jae Yang; Yun Seob Song
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2014-02-10       Impact factor: 5.428

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.