Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27600117›Full record

ReviewBMC medical ethics2016

If you build it, they will come: unintended future uses of organised health data collections.

Kieran C O'Doherty, Emily Christofides, Jeffery Yen, Heidi Beate Bentzen, Wylie Burke, Nina Hallowell, Barbara A Koenig, Donald J Willison

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC medical ethics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Research data use in a digital society: a deliberative public engagement.International journal of population data science · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Prospective Intention-Based Lifestyle Contracts: mHealth Technology and Responsibility in Healthcare.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Reimagining Public Health in the Aftermath of a Pandemic.American journal of public health · 2020
    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

8 authors.

Kieran C O'DohertyDepartment of Psychology, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada. kieran.odoherty@uoguelph.ca.
Emily ChristofidesDepartment of Psychology, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada.
Jeffery YenDepartment of Psychology, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada.
Heidi Beate BentzenCentre for Medical Ethics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Wylie BurkeDepartment of Bioethics & Humanities, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.
Nina HallowellEthox Centre, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Barbara A KoenigUCSF Bioethics, Institute for Health & Aging, University of California, San Francisco, USA.
Donald J WillisonInstitute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation | Joint Centre for Bioethics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.

Funding

Center for Transdisciplinary ELSI Research in Translational GenomicsP20HG007243 · NHGRI · KAISER FOUNDATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI HARRIS-WAI, JULIE NOEL, KOENIG, BARBARA A. · 2013 to 2016
$958k
NHGRI NIH HHS P20 HG007243
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth research increasingly relies on organized collections of health data and biological samples. There are many types of sample and data collections that are used for health research, though these are collected for many purposes, not all of which are health-related. These collections exist under different jurisdictional and regulatory arrangements and include: 1) Population biobanks, cohort studies, and genome databases 2) Clinical and public health data 3) Direct-to-consumer genetic testing 4) Social media 5) Fitness trackers, health apps, and biometric data sensors Ethical, legal, and social challenges of such collections are well recognized, but there has been limited attention to the broader societal implications of the existence of these collections. DISCUSSION: Although health research conducted using these collections is broadly recognized as beneficent, secondary uses of these data and samples may be controversial. We examine both documented and hypothetical scenarios of secondary uses of health data and samples. In particular, we focus on the use of health data for purposes of: Forensic investigations Civil lawsuits Identification of victims of mass casualty events Denial of entry for border security and immigration Making health resource rationing decisions Facilitating human rights abuses in autocratic regimes

conclusionsCurrent safeguards relating to the use of health data and samples include research ethics oversight and privacy laws. These safeguards have a strong focus on informed consent and anonymization, which are aimed at the protection of the individual research subject. They are not intended to address broader societal implications of health data and sample collections. As such, existing arrangements are insufficient to protect against subversion of health databases for non-sanctioned secondary uses, or to provide guidance for reasonable but controversial secondary uses. We are concerned that existing debate in the scholarly literature and beyond has not sufficiently recognized the secondary data uses we outline in this paper. Our main purpose, therefore, is to raise awareness of the potential for unforeseen and unintended consequences, in particular negative consequences, of the increased availability and development of health data collections for research, by providing a comprehensive review of documented and hypothetical non-health research uses of such data.

Indexed as

Data CollectionHuman RightsRecordsDatabases, FactualDual Use ResearchHumansInformed ConsentPrivacyBiobanksData sharingDiscriminationDNAHealth dataHealth researchPrivacySecondary uses

Identifiers

PMID27600117
PMCPMC5011895

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.