SynthesisBMC medical research methodology2013
"Let's get the best quality research we can": public awareness and acceptance of consent to use existing data in health research: a systematic review and qualitative study.
Synthesis in BMC medical research methodology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 91 papers, 3 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
91 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Specific measures for data-intensive health research without consent: a systematic review of soft law instruments and academic literature.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2024Pooled it
- Ethical issues in biomedical research using electronic health records: a systematic review.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2021Pooled it
- "Giving something back": A systematic review and ethical enquiry into public views on the use of patient data for research in the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland.Wellcome open research · 2018Pooled it
- Attitudes of Longitudinal Study Participants and Members of the Public Towards Data Sharing for Secondary Research: A Survey Based Approach.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2026Article
- What is the problem and what can be done when data sharing challenges public legitimacy?Nature communications · 2026Article
- Operationalizing transparency regarding the use of health data for research: a cross-sectional survey of citizens' perspectives.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Men's perceptions of long-term health outcomes following fertility problems: a UK-based mixed-methods survey.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026Article
- Beyond the dataset: integrating public voices in data science.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Article
- U.S. Vietnamese Parents' Perceptions of Different Approaches for Confirming Adolescent HPV Vaccination Records in Research Studies.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- If it wasn't for us, there would be no data: stakeholders' perspectives on patient involvement in the use of health data in Ireland.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Developing Digital Mental Health Tools With Culturally Diverse Parents and Young People: Qualitative User-Centered Design Study.JMIR pediatrics and parenting · 2025Article
- Exploring the Views of Young People, Including Those With a History of Self-Harm, on the Use of Their Routinely Generated Data for Mental Health Research: Web-Based Cross-Sectional Survey Study.JMIR mental health · 2025Article
- Exploring the implementation of a data trust committee: a qualitative evaluation of processes and practices.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- I don't mind my information going to the Moon, but I don't want any letters from Mars: a qualitative exploration of the challenges with secondary use of health data in Ireland.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025Article
- Placing conditions on sharing general practice data for research: Recommendations from two community juries.International journal of population data science · 2025Article
- What is the patient re-identification risk from using de-identified clinical free text data for health research?AI and ethics · 2025Review
- Health disparities and selection bias in obtaining broad consent in a general practitioner setting.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Bias in obtaining broad consent in a German general practice? - Preliminary results from a cross-sectional study.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2024Article
- Article
31 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOpt-in consent is usually required for research, but is known to introduce selection bias. This is a particular problem for large scale epidemiological studies using only pre-collected health data. Most previous studies have shown that members of the public value opt-in consent and can perceive research without consent as an invasion of privacy. Past research has suggested that people are generally unaware of research processes and existing safeguards, and that education may increase the acceptability of research without prior informed consent, but this recommendation has not been formally evaluated. Our objectives were to determine the range of public opinion about the use of existing medical data for research and to explore views about consent to a secondary review of medical records for research. We also investigated the effect of the provision of detailed information about the potential effect of selection bias on public acceptability of the use of data for research.
methodsWe carried out a systematic review of existing literature on public attitudes to secondary use of existing health records identified by searching PubMed (1966-present), Embase (1974-present) and reference lists of identified studies to provide a general overview, followed by a qualitative focus group study with 19 older men recruited from rural and suburban primary care practices in the UK to explore key issues in detail.
resultsThe systematic review identified twenty-seven relevant papers and the findings suggested that males and older people were more likely to consent to a review of their medical data. Many studies noted participants' lack of knowledge about research processes and existing safeguards and this was reflected in the focus groups. Focus group participants became more accepting of the use of pre-collected medical data without consent after being given information about selection bias and research processes. All participants were keen to contribute to NHS-related research but some were concerned about data-sharing for commercial gain and the potential misuse of information.
conclusionsIncreasing public education about research and specific targeted information provision could promote trust in research processes and safeguards, which in turn could increase the acceptability of research without specific consent where the need for consent would lead to biased findings and impede research necessary to improve public health.
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.