ArticleImplementation science : IS2012
Trust, confidentiality, and the acceptability of sharing HIV-related patient data: lessons learned from a mixed methods study about Health Information Exchanges.
Article in Implementation science : IS, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
32 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Patient and Public Willingness to Share Personal Health Data for Third-Party or Secondary Uses: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Pooled it
- Measuring the willingness to share personal health information: a systematic review.Frontiers in public health · 2023Pooled it
- Role of trust and trustworthiness in implementation science studies: a systematic review protocol.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Navigating Privacy in Health Data Sharing: A Patient-Centric Approach to Health Information Exchange.Healthcare management forum · 2026Article
- Retention and Acceptability of a Linkage-to-Care Intervention Among Patients with Chronic Conditions in Rural South Africa.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- Inequities in willingness to disclose contact information to access free mpox self-testing kits among MSM in China: a COM-B-informed multi-center study.International journal for equity in health · 2026Article
- Community Comfort With Automatic Sharing of Race, Ethnicity, and Language Data Between Health Care Settings: Cross-Sectional Study.Interactive journal of medical research · 2025Article
- The Impact of Trust and the Role of the Opt-Out Mechanism in Willingness to Share Health Data via Electronic Health Records in Germany: Telephone Survey Study.JMIR human factors · 2025Article
- Health data sharing in Germany: individual preconditions, trust and motives.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Communication and coordination of care for people living with HIV: a qualitative study of the patient perspective.BMC primary care · 2024Article
- Building trusting relationships in teams to support evidence use and implementation in human services: feasibility and acceptability of a training and coaching approach.Frontiers in health services · 2024Article
- Rapid start antiretroviral therapies for improved engagement in HIV care: implementation science evaluation protocol.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Patients' and Members of the Public's Wishes Regarding Transparency in the Context of Secondary Use of Health Data: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Understanding and addressing privacy and confidentiality concerns associated with the provision of mobile HIV care: a qualitative study.AIDS care · 2022Article
- Foundations for Meaningful Consent in Canada's Digital Health Ecosystem: Retrospective Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2022Article
- Building trusting relationships to support implementation: A proposed theoretical model.Frontiers in health services · 2022Article
- Acceptability of a Patient Portal (Opal) in HIV Clinical Care: A Feasibility Study.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Article
- Understanding the Barriers and Facilitators to Sharing Patient-Generated Health Data Using Digital Technology for People Living With Long-Term Health Conditions: A Narrative Review.Frontiers in public health · 2021Review
- Unintended consequences: a qualitative study exploring the impact of collecting implementation process data with phone interviews on implementation activities.Implementation science communications · 2020Article
- Mental health professionals' perceptions on patients control of data sharing.Health informatics journal · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundConcerns about the confidentiality of personal health information have been identified as a potential obstacle to implementation of Health Information Exchanges (HIEs). Considering the stigma and confidentiality issues historically associated with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) disease, we examine how trust-in technology, processes, and people-influenced the acceptability of data sharing among stakeholders prior to implementation of six HIEs intended to improve HIV care in parts of the United States. Our analyses identify the kinds of concerns expressed by stakeholders about electronic data sharing and focus on the factors that ultimately facilitated acceptability of the new exchanges.
methodsWe conducted 549 surveys with patients and 66 semi-structured interviews with providers and other stakeholders prior to implementation of the HIEs to assess concerns about confidentiality in the electronic sharing of patient data. The patient quantitative data were analyzed using SAS 9.2 to yield sample descriptive statistics. The analysis of the qualitative interviews with providers and other stakeholders followed an open-coding process, and convergent and divergent perspectives emerging from those data were examined within and across the HIEs.
resultsWe found widespread acceptability for electronic sharing of HIV-related patient data through HIEs. This acceptability appeared to be driven by growing comfort with information technologies, confidence in the security protocols utilized to protect data, trust in the providers and institutions who use the technologies, belief in the benefits to the patients, and awareness that electronic exchange represents an enhancement of data sharing already taking place by other means. HIE acceptability depended both on preexisting trust among patients, providers, and institutions and on building consensus and trust in the HIEs as part of preparation for implementation. The process of HIE development also resulted in forging shared vision among institutions.
conclusionsPatients and providers are willing to accept the electronic sharing of HIV patient data to improve care for a disease historically seen as highly stigmatized. Acceptability depends on the effort expended to understand and address potential concerns related to data sharing and confidentiality, and on the trust established among stakeholders in terms of the nature of the systems and how they will be used.
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.