Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15635312›Full record

ReviewAnnals of emergency medicine2005

From Hippocrates to HIPAA: privacy and confidentiality in emergency medicine--Part II: Challenges in the emergency department.

John C Moskop, Catherine A Marco, Gregory Luke Larkin, Joel M Geiderman, Arthur R Derse

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of emergency medicine, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. The ethics of proximity: Enrolling patients in emergency department hallway beds for suicide research.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Privacy-preserving model learning on a blockchain network-of-networks.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2020
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Supporting patient care in the emergency department with a computerized whiteboard system.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

John C MoskopDepartment of Medical Humanities, The Brody School of Medicine at East Carolina University, Bioethics Center, University Health Systems of Eastern Carolina, Greenville, NC 27834, USA. moskopj@mail.ecu.edu
Catherine A Marco
Gregory Luke Larkin
Joel M Geiderman
Arthur R Derse

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Part I of this article reviewed the concepts of privacy and confidentiality and described the moral and legal foundations and limits of these values in health care. Part II highlights specific privacy and confidentiality issues encountered in the emergency department (ED). Discussed first are physical privacy issues in the ED, including problems of ED design and crowding, issues of patient and staff safety, the presence of visitors, law enforcement officers, students, and other observers, and filming activities. The article then examines confidentiality issues in the ED, including protecting medical records, the duty to warn, reportable conditions, telephone inquiries, media requests, communication among health care professionals, habitual patient files, the use of patient images, electronic communication, and information about minor patients.

Indexed as

PrivacyConfidentialityEmergency Service, HospitalHealth Insurance Portability and Accountability ActHumansUnited StatesProfessional Patient Relationship

Identifiers

PMID15635312
PMCPMC7119013

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.