Katherine K Kim1, Jill G Joseph2, Lucila Ohno-Machado3. 1. Betty Irene Moore School of Nursing, University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA 95817 USA kathykim@ucdavis.edu. 2. Betty Irene Moore School of Nursing, University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA, USA. 3. Division of Biomedical Informatics, Department of Medicine and Clinical Translational Research Institute, University of, California San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA.
Abstract
UNLABELLED: New models of healthcare delivery such as accountable care organizations and patient-centered medical homes seek to improve quality, access, and cost. They rely on a robust, secure technology infrastructure provided by health information exchanges (HIEs) and distributed research networks and the willingness of patients to share their data. There are few large, in-depth studies of US consumers' views on privacy, security, and consent in electronic data sharing for healthcare and research together. OBJECTIVE: This paper addresses this gap, reporting on a survey which asks about California consumers' views of data sharing for healthcare and research together. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The survey conducted was a representative, random-digit dial telephone survey of 800 Californians, performed in Spanish and English. RESULTS: There is a great deal of concern that HIEs will worsen privacy (40.3%) and security (42.5%). Consumers are in favor of electronic data sharing but elements of transparency are important: individual control, who has access, and the purpose for use of data. Respondents were more likely to agree to share deidentified information for research than to share identified information for healthcare (76.2% vs 57.3%, p < .001). DISCUSSION: While consumers show willingness to share health information electronically, they value individual control and privacy. Responsiveness to these needs, rather than mere reliance on Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), may improve support of data networks. CONCLUSION: Responsiveness to the public's concerns regarding their health information is a pre-requisite for patient-centeredness. This is one of the first in-depth studies of attitudes about electronic data sharing that compares attitudes of the same individual towards healthcare and research.
UNLABELLED: New models of healthcare delivery such as accountable care organizations and patient-centered medical homes seek to improve quality, access, and cost. They rely on a robust, secure technology infrastructure provided by health information exchanges (HIEs) and distributed research networks and the willingness of patients to share their data. There are few large, in-depth studies of US consumers' views on privacy, security, and consent in electronic data sharing for healthcare and research together. OBJECTIVE: This paper addresses this gap, reporting on a survey which asks about California consumers' views of data sharing for healthcare and research together. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The survey conducted was a representative, random-digit dial telephone survey of 800 Californians, performed in Spanish and English. RESULTS: There is a great deal of concern that HIEs will worsen privacy (40.3%) and security (42.5%). Consumers are in favor of electronic data sharing but elements of transparency are important: individual control, who has access, and the purpose for use of data. Respondents were more likely to agree to share deidentified information for research than to share identified information for healthcare (76.2% vs 57.3%, p < .001). DISCUSSION: While consumers show willingness to share health information electronically, they value individual control and privacy. Responsiveness to these needs, rather than mere reliance on Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), may improve support of data networks. CONCLUSION: Responsiveness to the public's concerns regarding their health information is a pre-requisite for patient-centeredness. This is one of the first in-depth studies of attitudes about electronic data sharing that compares attitudes of the same individual towards healthcare and research.
Authors: Israel T Agaku; Akinyele O Adisa; Olalekan A Ayo-Yusuf; Gregory N Connolly Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2013-08-23 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Lucila Ohno-Machado; Zia Agha; Douglas S Bell; Lisa Dahm; Michele E Day; Jason N Doctor; Davera Gabriel; Maninder K Kahlon; Katherine K Kim; Michael Hogarth; Michael E Matheny; Daniella Meeker; Jonathan R Nebeker Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2014-04-29 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Rochelle D Jones; Chris Krenz; Michele Gornick; Kent A Griffith; Rebecca Spence; Angela R Bradbury; Raymond De Vries; Sarah T Hawley; Rodney A Hayward; Robin Zon; Sage Bolte; Navid Sadeghi; Richard L Schilsky; Reshma Jagsi Journal: JCO Oncol Pract Date: 2020-04-30
Authors: Feng Chen; Shuang Wang; Xiaoqian Jiang; Sijie Ding; Yao Lu; Jihoon Kim; S Cenk Sahinalp; Chisato Shimizu; Jane C Burns; Victoria J Wright; Eileen Png; Martin L Hibberd; David D Lloyd; Hai Yang; Amalio Telenti; Cinnamon S Bloss; Dov Fox; Kristin Lauter; Lucila Ohno-Machado Journal: Bioinformatics Date: 2017-03-15 Impact factor: 6.937
Authors: Christopher A Harle; Elizabeth H Golembiewski; Kiarash P Rahmanian; Janice L Krieger; Dorothy Hagmajer; Arch G Mainous; Ray E Moseley Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2018-03-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Carolyn L Turvey; Dawn M Klein; Kim M Nazi; Susan T Haidary; Omar Bouhaddou; Nelson Hsing; Margaret Donahue Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2020-05-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Reshma Jagsi; Kent A Griffith; Aaron Sabolch; Rochelle Jones; Rebecca Spence; Raymond De Vries; David Grande; Angela R Bradbury Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2017-05-24 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Reshma Jagsi; Kent A Griffith; Rochelle D Jones; Chris Krenz; Michele Gornick; Rebecca Spence; Raymond De Vries; Sarah T Hawley; Robin Zon; Sage Bolte; Navid Sadeghi; Richard L Schilsky; Angela R Bradbury Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2019-10-02 Impact factor: 44.544