16
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      Submit your digital health research with an established publisher
      - celebrating 25 years of open access

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Secondary Use of Clinical Data in Data-Gathering, Non-Interventional Research or Learning Activities: Definition, Types, and a Framework for Risk Assessment

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The secondary use of clinical data in data-gathering, non-interventional research or learning activities ( SeConts) has great potential for scientific progress and health care improvement. At the same time, it poses relevant risks for the privacy and informational self-determination of patients whose data are used.

          Objective

          Since the current literature lacks a tailored framework for risk assessment in SeConts as well as a clarification of the concept and practical scope of SeConts, we aim to fill this gap.

          Methods

          In this study, we analyze each element of the concept of SeConts to provide a synthetic definition, investigate the practical relevance and scope of SeConts through a literature review, and operationalize the widespread definition of risk (as a harmful event of a certain magnitude that occurs with a certain probability) to conduct a tailored analysis of privacy risk factors typically implied in SeConts.

          Results

          We offer a conceptual clarification and definition of SeConts and provide a list of types of research and learning activities that can be subsumed under the definition of SeConts. We also offer a proposal for the classification of SeConts types into the categories non-interventional (observational) clinical research, quality control and improvement, or public health research. In addition, we provide a list of risk factors that determine the probability or magnitude of harm implied in SeConts. The risk factors provide a framework for assessing the privacy-related risks for patients implied in SeConts. We illustrate the use of risk assessment by applying it to a concrete example.

          Conclusions

          In the future, research ethics committees and data use and access committees will be able to rely on and apply the framework offered here when reviewing projects of secondary use of clinical data for learning and research purposes.

          Related collections

          Most cited references71

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          k-ANONYMITY: A MODEL FOR PROTECTING PRIVACY

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Cancer risk in 680 000 people exposed to computed tomography scans in childhood or adolescence: data linkage study of 11 million Australians

            Objective To assess the cancer risk in children and adolescents following exposure to low dose ionising radiation from diagnostic computed tomography (CT) scans. Design Population based, cohort, data linkage study in Australia. Cohort members 10.9 million people identified from Australian Medicare records, aged 0-19 years on 1 January 1985 or born between 1 January 1985 and 31 December 2005; all exposures to CT scans funded by Medicare during 1985-2005 were identified for this cohort. Cancers diagnosed in cohort members up to 31 December 2007 were obtained through linkage to national cancer records. Main outcome Cancer incidence rates in individuals exposed to a CT scan more than one year before any cancer diagnosis, compared with cancer incidence rates in unexposed individuals. Results 60 674 cancers were recorded, including 3150 in 680 211 people exposed to a CT scan at least one year before any cancer diagnosis. The mean duration of follow-up after exposure was 9.5 years. Overall cancer incidence was 24% greater for exposed than for unexposed people, after accounting for age, sex, and year of birth (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.24 (95% confidence interval 1.20 to 1.29); P<0.001). We saw a dose-response relation, and the IRR increased by 0.16 (0.13 to 0.19) for each additional CT scan. The IRR was greater after exposure at younger ages (P<0.001 for trend). At 1-4, 5-9, 10-14, and 15 or more years since first exposure, IRRs were 1.35 (1.25 to 1.45), 1.25 (1.17 to 1.34), 1.14 (1.06 to 1.22), and 1.24 (1.14 to 1.34), respectively. The IRR increased significantly for many types of solid cancer (digestive organs, melanoma, soft tissue, female genital, urinary tract, brain, and thyroid); leukaemia, myelodysplasia, and some other lymphoid cancers. There was an excess of 608 cancers in people exposed to CT scans (147 brain, 356 other solid, 48 leukaemia or myelodysplasia, and 57 other lymphoid). The absolute excess incidence rate for all cancers combined was 9.38 per 100 000 person years at risk, as of 31 December 2007. The average effective radiation dose per scan was estimated as 4.5 mSv. Conclusions The increased incidence of cancer after CT scan exposure in this cohort was mostly due to irradiation. Because the cancer excess was still continuing at the end of follow-up, the eventual lifetime risk from CT scans cannot yet be determined. Radiation doses from contemporary CT scans are likely to be lower than those in 1985-2005, but some increase in cancer risk is still likely from current scans. Future CT scans should be limited to situations where there is a definite clinical indication, with every scan optimised to provide a diagnostic CT image at the lowest possible radiation dose.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Identifying personal genomes by surname inference.

              Sharing sequencing data sets without identifiers has become a common practice in genomics. Here, we report that surnames can be recovered from personal genomes by profiling short tandem repeats on the Y chromosome (Y-STRs) and querying recreational genetic genealogy databases. We show that a combination of a surname with other types of metadata, such as age and state, can be used to triangulate the identity of the target. A key feature of this technique is that it entirely relies on free, publicly accessible Internet resources. We quantitatively analyze the probability of identification for U.S. males. We further demonstrate the feasibility of this technique by tracing back with high probability the identities of multiple participants in public sequencing projects.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                J Med Internet Res
                J Med Internet Res
                JMIR
                Journal of Medical Internet Research
                JMIR Publications (Toronto, Canada )
                1439-4456
                1438-8871
                June 2021
                8 June 2021
                : 23
                : 6
                : e26631
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Section for Translational Medical Ethics, Department of Medical Oncology National Center for Tumor Diseases Heidelberg University Hospital Heidelberg Germany
                [2 ] Section for Translational Medical Ethics National Center for Tumor Diseases German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) Heidelberg Germany
                Author notes
                Corresponding Author: Martin Jungkunz martin.jungkunz@ 123456med.uni-heidelberg.de
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1891-9790
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0459-5059
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6532-9876
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7460-0154
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2038-1456
                Article
                v23i6e26631
                10.2196/26631
                8241435
                34100760
                40d06f44-d26b-4809-895c-20f3346d03b4
                ©Martin Jungkunz, Anja Köngeter, Katja Mehlis, Eva C Winkler, Christoph Schickhardt. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 08.06.2021.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://www.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.

                History
                : 21 December 2020
                : 8 February 2021
                : 10 March 2021
                : 6 May 2021
                Categories
                Original Paper
                Original Paper

                Medicine
                secondary use,risk assessment,clinical data,ethics,risk factors,risks,privacy,electronic health records,research,patient data

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content80

                Cited by7

                Most referenced authors577