Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26984048›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2016

Balancing digital information-sharing and patient privacy when engaging families in the intensive care unit.

Samuel M Brown, Hanan J Aboumatar, Leslie Francis, John Halamka, Ronen Rozenblum, Eileen Rubin, Barbara Sarnoff Lee, Jeremy Sugarman, Kathleen Turner, Micah Vorwaller and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

12 authors.

Samuel M BrownCenter for Humanizing Critical Care, Intermountain Healthcare, 5121 S. Cottonwood St, Murray, UT USA and Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA samuel.brown@imail.org.
Hanan J AboumatarArmstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine and Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Leslie FrancisUniversity of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
John HalamkaBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Ronen RozenblumBrigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Eileen RubinARDS Foundation, Chicago, IL, USA.
Barbara Sarnoff LeeBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Jeremy SugarmanBerman Institute of Bioethics, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD USA Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD USA Department of Health Policy and Management, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Kathleen TurnerSan Francisco Medical Center, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Micah VorwallerUniversity of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Dominick L FroschGordon and Betty Moore Foundation, San Francisco, CA, USA and Department of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Privacy, Access, and Engagement Task Force of the Libretto Consortium of the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patients in intensive care units (ICUs) may lack decisional capacity and may depend on proxy decision makers (PDMs) to make medical decisions on their behalf. High-quality information-sharing with PDMs, including through such means as health information technology, could improve communication and decision making and could potentially minimize the psychological consequences of an ICU stay for both patients and their family members. However, alongside these anticipated benefits of information-sharing are risks of unwanted disclosure of sensitive information. Approaches to identifying the optimal balance between access to digital health information to facilitate engagement and protecting patient privacy are urgently needed. We identified eight themes that should be considered in balancing health information access and patient privacy: 1) potential benefits to patients from PDM data access; 2) potential harms to patients from such access; 3) the moral status of families within the patient-clinician relationship; 4) the scope of relevant information provided to PDMs; 5) issues around defining PDMs' authority; 6) methods for eliciting and documenting patient preferences about their family's information access; 7) the relevance of methods for ascertaining the identity of PDMs; and 8) the obligations of hospitals to prevent privacy breaches by PDMs. We conclude that PDMs should typically have access to health information from the current episode of care when the patient is decisionally impaired, unless the patient has previously expressed a clear preference that PDMs not have such access.

Indexed as

ConfidentialityDecision MakingFamilyInformation DisseminationHumansIntensive Care UnitsPatient PreferenceProfessional-Family RelationsProxyaccessdigital informationethicsintensive care unitpatient-centered carepatient engagementpatient privacypersonal health recordsshared decision making

Identifiers

PMID26984048
PMCPMC11741010

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.