ArticleAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2006
Electronic patient data confidentiality practices among surgical trainees: questionnaire study.
Article in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- "Is There An App For That?" Orthopaedic Patient Preferences For A Smartphone Application.Applied clinical informatics · 2017Article
- Smartphone use in neurosurgery? APP-solutely!Surgical neurology international · 2014Review
- Reply to letter to the editor: Smartphone apps for orthopaedic surgeons.Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2013Article
- Annual survey on the level and extent of usage of electronic health records in government-related hospitals in Eastern Province, Saudi Arabia.Perspectives in health information managemen · 2011Article
- Analysis of the ethical aspects of professional confidentiality in dental practice.Journal of applied oral science : revista FOBArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe objective of this work was to evaluate the safeguards implemented by surgical trainees to protect the confidentiality of electronic patient data through a structured questionnaire sent to Northern Ireland surgical trainees. PARTICIPANTS AND
methodsA group of 32 basic and higher surgical trainees attending a meeting of the Northern Ireland Association of Surgeons-in-Training were invited to complete a questionnaire regarding their computer use, UK Data Protection Act, 1988 registration and electronic data confidentiality practices.
resultsOf these 32 trainees, 29 returned completed questionnaires of whom 26 trainees regularly stored sensitive patient data for audit or research purposes on a computer. Only one person was registered under the Data Protection Act, 1988. Of the computers used to store and analyse sensitive data, only 3 of 14 desktops, 8 of 19 laptops and 3 of 14 hand-held computers forced a password logon. Of the 29 trainees, 16 used the same password for all machines, and 25 of 27 passwords were less than 8 characters long. Two respondents declined to reveal details of their secure passwords. Half of all trainees had never adjusted their internet security settings, despite all 14 desktops, 16 of 19 laptops and 5 of 14 hand-helds being routinely connected to the internet. Of the 29 trainees, 28 never encrypted their sensitive data files. Ten trainees had sent unencrypted sensitive patient data over the internet, using a non-secure server.
conclusionsElectronic data confidentiality practices amongst Northern Ireland surgical trainees are unsafe. Simple practical measures to safeguard confidentiality are recommended.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.