ReviewBMC medical ethics2016
If you build it, they will come: unintended future uses of organised health data collections.
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.
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
31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Ethical issues raised by artificial intelligence and big data in population health: a scoping review.Frontiers in sociology · 2025Pooled it
- Secondary Use of Health Data in Canada and the European Union: Expectations, Frictions and the Politics of Scale.Sociology of health & illness · 2026Article
- Stakeholder Perspectives on Humanistic Implementation of Computer Perception in Health Care: Qualitative Study.JMIR mental health · 2026Article
- Participant Contributions to Person-Generated Health Data Research Using Mobile Devices: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Research data use in a digital society: a deliberative public engagement.International journal of population data science · 2024Article
- Is there a civic duty to support medical AI development by sharing electronic health records?BMC medical ethics · 2022Article
- Multi Scale Ethics-Why We Need to Consider the Ethics of AI in Healthcare at Different Scales.Science and engineering ethics · 2022Article
- What ethical approaches are used by scientists when sharing health data? An interview study.BMC medical ethics · 2022Article
- Motives for withdrawal of participation in biobanking and participants' willingness to allow linkages of their data.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2022Article
- Article
- The difficulties of broad data sharing in genomic medicine: Empirical evidence from diverse participants in prenatal and pediatric clinical genomics research.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2022Article
- Knowledge and Attitudes about Privacy and Secondary Data Use among African-Americans Using Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing.Public health genomics · 2022Article
- Implementation of Fingerprint Technology for Unique Patient Matching and Identification at an HIV Care and Treatment Facility in Western Kenya: Cross-sectional Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- Prospective Intention-Based Lifestyle Contracts: mHealth Technology and Responsibility in Healthcare.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2021Article
- Preferences of the Public for Sharing Health Data: Discrete Choice Experiment.JMIR medical informatics · 2021Article
- Anticipatory Governance in Biobanking: Security and Risk Management in Digital Health.Science and engineering ethics · 2021Article
- Opportunities and challenges for the computational interpretation of rare variation in clinically important genes.American journal of human genetics · 2021Review
- Considerations for an integrated population health databank in Africa: lessons from global best practices.Wellcome open research · 2021Article
- Secondary Data Usage in Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing: To What Extent Are Customers Aware and Concerned?Public health genomics · 2021Article
- Reimagining Public Health in the Aftermath of a Pandemic.American journal of public health · 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
8 authors.
Funding
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
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.