David Grande1, David A Asch2, Fei Wan2, Angela R Bradbury2, Reshma Jagsi2, Nandita Mitra2. 1. University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine; Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania; Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA; and University of Michigan School of Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI dgrande@wharton.upenn.edu. 2. University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine; Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania; Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA; and University of Michigan School of Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Growing use of electronic health information increases opportunities to build population cancer databases for research and care delivery. Understanding patient views on reuse of health information is essential to shape privacy policies and build trust in these initiatives. METHODS: We randomly assigned nationally representative participants (N = 3,336) with and without prior cancer to six of 18 scenarios describing different uses of electronic health information. The scenarios varied the user, use, and sensitivity of the information. Participants rated each scenario on a scale of 1 to 10 assessing their willingness to share their electronic health information. We used conjoint analysis to measure the relative importance of each attribute (ie, use, user, and sensitivity). RESULTS:Participants with and without a prior diagnosis of cancer had a similar willingness to share health information (0.27; P = .42). Both cancer and noncancer participants rated the purpose of information use as the most important factor (importance weights, 67.1% and 45.6%, respectively). For cancer participants, the sensitivity of the information was more important (importance weights, 29.8% v 1.2%). However, cancer participants were more willing to share their health information when the information included more sensitive genetic information (0.48; P = .015). Cancer and noncancer respondents rated uses and users similarly. CONCLUSION: The information sharing preferences of participants with and without a prior diagnosis of cancer were driven mainly by the purpose of information reuse. Although conventional thinking suggests patients with cancer might be less willing to share their health information, we found participants with cancer were more willing to share their inherited genetic information.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: Growing use of electronic health information increases opportunities to build population cancer databases for research and care delivery. Understanding patient views on reuse of health information is essential to shape privacy policies and build trust in these initiatives. METHODS: We randomly assigned nationally representative participants (N = 3,336) with and without prior cancer to six of 18 scenarios describing different uses of electronic health information. The scenarios varied the user, use, and sensitivity of the information. Participants rated each scenario on a scale of 1 to 10 assessing their willingness to share their electronic health information. We used conjoint analysis to measure the relative importance of each attribute (ie, use, user, and sensitivity). RESULTS:Participants with and without a prior diagnosis of cancer had a similar willingness to share health information (0.27; P = .42). Both cancer and noncancer participants rated the purpose of information use as the most important factor (importance weights, 67.1% and 45.6%, respectively). For cancerparticipants, the sensitivity of the information was more important (importance weights, 29.8% v 1.2%). However, cancerparticipants were more willing to share their health information when the information included more sensitive genetic information (0.48; P = .015). Cancer and noncancer respondents rated uses and users similarly. CONCLUSION: The information sharing preferences of participants with and without a prior diagnosis of cancer were driven mainly by the purpose of information reuse. Although conventional thinking suggests patients with cancer might be less willing to share their health information, we found participants with cancer were more willing to share their inherited genetic information.
Authors: Charles Safran; Meryl Bloomrosen; W Edward Hammond; Steven Labkoff; Suzanne Markel-Fox; Paul C Tang; Don E Detmer Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2006-10-31 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Emily A Peterson; Kara J Milliron; Karen E Lewis; Susan D Goold; Sofia D Merajver Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2002-01 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Paul J Wallace; Nilay D Shah; Taylor Dennen; Paul A Bleicher; Paul D Bleicher; William H Crown Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2014-07 Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Kira A Apse; Barbara B Biesecker; Francis M Giardiello; Barbara P Fuller; Barbara A Bernhardt Journal: Genet Med Date: 2004 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 8.822
Authors: Susan Brown Trinidad; Stephanie M Fullerton; Julie M Bares; Gail P Jarvik; Eric B Larson; Wylie Burke Journal: Genet Med Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 8.822
Authors: Yaniv Erlich; James B Williams; David Glazer; Kenneth Yocum; Nita Farahany; Maynard Olson; Arvind Narayanan; Lincoln D Stein; Jan A Witkowski; Robert C Kain Journal: PLoS Biol Date: 2014-11-04 Impact factor: 8.029
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
Authors: Zachary A K Frosch; Esin C Namoglu; Nandita Mitra; Daniel J Landsburg; Sunita D Nasta; Justin E Bekelman; Raghuram Iyengar; Carmen E Guerra; Marilyn M Schapira Journal: JCO Oncol Pract Date: 2021-09-15
Authors: Andrew G Shuman; Michele C Gornick; Collin Brummel; Madison Kent; Kayte Spector-Bagdady; Elliot Biddle; Carol R Bradford; J Chad Brenner Journal: Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2019-12-10 Impact factor: 5.591
Authors: Kayte Spector-Bagdady; Chris D Krenz; Collin Brummel; J Chad Brenner; Carol R Bradford; Andrew G Shuman Journal: Oncologist Date: 2020-03-13 Impact factor: 5.837
Authors: Saira Khan; Marquita W Lewis-Thames; Yunan Han; Lindsay Fuzzell; Marvin E Langston; Justin X Moore Journal: Med Care Date: 2020-12 Impact factor: 3.178