Literature DB >> 33248520

Preferences for Accessing Electronic Health Records for Research Purposes: Views of Parents Who Have a Child With a Known or Suspected Genetic Condition.

Melissa Raspa1, Ryan S Paquin2, Derek S Brown3, Sara Andrews2, Anne Edwards2, Rebecca Moultrie2, Laura Wagner2, MaryKate Frisch4, Lauren Turner-Brown4, Anne C Wheeler2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to examine parental preferences for researchers accessing their child's electronic health record across 3 groups: those with a child with (1) a known genetic condition (fragile X syndrome FXS), (2) a suspected genetic condition (autism spectrum disorder [ASD]), and (3) no known genetic condition (typically developing).
METHODS: After extensive formative work, a discrete choice experiment was designed consisting of 5 attributes, each with 2 or 3 levels, including (1) type of researcher, (2) the use of personally identifiable information, (3) the use of sensitive information, (4) personal importance of research, and (5) return of results. Stratified mixed logit and latent class conditional logit models were examined.
RESULTS: Parents of children with FXS or ASD had relatively higher preferences for research conducted by nonprofits than parents of typically developing children. Parents of children with ASD also preferred research using non-identifiable and nonsensitive information. Parents of children with FXS or ASD also had preferences for research that was personally important and returned either summary or individual results. Although a few child and family characteristics were related to preferences, they did not overall define the subgroups of parents.
CONCLUSIONS: Although electronic health record preference research has been conducted with the general public, this is the first study to examine the opinions of parents who have a child with a known or suspected genetic condition. These parents were open to studies using their child's electronic health record because they may have more to gain from this type of research.
Copyright © 2020 ISPOR–The Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  autism spectrum disorder; discrete choice experiment; electronic health records; fragile X syndrome; genetic conditions

Year:  2020        PMID: 33248520      PMCID: PMC7701359          DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2020.06.016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Value Health        ISSN: 1098-3015            Impact factor:   5.725


  69 in total

1.  What research participants want to know about genetic research results: the impact of "genetic exceptionalism".

Authors:  Miguel Ruiz-Canela; J Ignacio Valle-Mansilla; Daniel P Sulmasy
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 1.742

2.  Statistical Methods for the Analysis of Discrete Choice Experiments: A Report of the ISPOR Conjoint Analysis Good Research Practices Task Force.

Authors:  A Brett Hauber; Juan Marcos González; Catharina G M Groothuis-Oudshoorn; Thomas Prior; Deborah A Marshall; Charles Cunningham; Maarten J IJzerman; John F P Bridges
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2016-05-12       Impact factor: 5.725

Review 3.  Digital health: meeting the ethical and policy challenges.

Authors:  Effy Vayena; Tobias Haeusermann; Afua Adjekum; Alessandro Blasimme
Journal:  Swiss Med Wkly       Date:  2018-01-16       Impact factor: 2.193

4.  Public preferences about secondary uses of electronic health information.

Authors:  David Grande; Nandita Mitra; Anand Shah; Fei Wan; David A Asch
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2013-10-28       Impact factor: 21.873

5.  Genetics of autism spectrum disorders.

Authors:  Daniel H Geschwind
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2011-08-18       Impact factor: 20.229

6.  Brief questions to identify patients with inadequate health literacy.

Authors:  Lisa D Chew; Katharine A Bradley; Edward J Boyko
Journal:  Fam Med       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 1.756

7.  Clinical research for rare disease: opportunities, challenges, and solutions.

Authors:  Robert C Griggs; Mark Batshaw; Mary Dunkle; Rashmi Gopal-Srivastava; Edward Kaye; Jeffrey Krischer; Tan Nguyen; Kathleen Paulus; Peter A Merkel
Journal:  Mol Genet Metab       Date:  2008-11-13       Impact factor: 4.797

8.  Patients want granular privacy control over health information in electronic medical records.

Authors:  Kelly Caine; Rima Hanania
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2012-11-26       Impact factor: 4.497

9.  The Cystic Fibrosis Foundation Patient Registry. Design and Methods of a National Observational Disease Registry.

Authors:  Emily A Knapp; Aliza K Fink; Christopher H Goss; Ase Sewall; Josh Ostrenga; Christopher Dowd; Alexander Elbert; Kristofer M Petren; Bruce C Marshall
Journal:  Ann Am Thorac Soc       Date:  2016-07

10.  The social licence for research: why care.data ran into trouble.

Authors:  Pam Carter; Graeme T Laurie; Mary Dixon-Woods
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2015-01-23       Impact factor: 2.903

View more
  1 in total

1.  How rare and common risk variation jointly affect liability for autism spectrum disorder.

Authors:  Lambertus Klei; Lora Lee McClain; Behrang Mahjani; Klea Panayidou; Silvia De Rubeis; Anna-Carin Säll Grahnat; Gun Karlsson; Yangyi Lu; Nadine Melhem; Xinyi Xu; Abraham Reichenberg; Sven Sandin; Christina M Hultman; Joseph D Buxbaum; Kathryn Roeder; Bernie Devlin
Journal:  Mol Autism       Date:  2021-10-06       Impact factor: 7.509

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.