Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21852633›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of public health2011

Informational privacy, public health, and state laws.

Jean O'Connor, Gene Matthews

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of public health, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

2 authors.

Jean O'ConnorCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA. Jean.C.OConnor@state.or.us
Gene Matthews

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Developments in information technology that make it possible to rapidly transmit health information also raise questions about the possible inappropriate use and protection of identifiable (or potentially identifiable) personal health information. Despite efforts to improve state laws, adoption of provisions has lagged. We found that half of states have no statutes addressing nondisclosure of personally identifiable health information generally held by public health agencies. Exceptional treatment of HIV, sexually transmitted infections, or tuberculosis-related information was common. Where other provisions were found, there was little consistency in the laws across states. The variation in state laws supports the need to build consensus on the appropriate use and disclosure of public health information among public health practitioners.

Indexed as

State GovernmentConfidentialityHealth Insurance Portability and Accountability ActHumansPresumed ConsentPublic HealthUnited States

Identifiers

PMID21852633
PMCPMC3222345

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.