Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29681040›Full record

ArticleYearbook of medical informatics2018

Balancing Between Privacy and Patient Needs for Health Information in the Age of Participatory Health and Social Media: A Scoping Review.

Mowafa Househ, Rebecca Grainger, Carolyn Petersen, Panagiotis Bamidis, Mark Merolli

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Yearbook of medical informatics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. When HIPAA hurts: legal barriers to texting may reinforce healthcare disparities and disenfranchise vulnerable patients.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Ten Topics to Get Started in Medical Informatics Research.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

5 authors.

Mowafa HousehDepartment of Health Informatics, College of Public Health and Health Informatics, King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Ministry of National Guard Health Affairs, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Rebecca GraingerRehabilitation Teaching and Research Unit (RTRU), University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand.
Carolyn PetersenGlobal Business Solutions, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, United States.
Panagiotis BamidisLab of Medical Physics, Medical School, Aristotle University, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Mark MerolliSchool of Health Science, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesWith the increased use of participatory health enabling technologies, such as social media, balancing the need for health information with patient privacy and confidentiality has become a more complex and immediate concern. The purpose of this paper produced by the members of the IMIA Participatory Health and Social Media (PHSM) working group is to investigate patient needs for health information using participatory health enabling technologies, while balancing their needs for privacy and confidentiality.

methodsSix domain areas including media sharing platforms, patient portals, web-based platforms, crowdsourcing websites, medical avatars, and other mobile health technologies were identified by five members of the IMIA PHSM working group as relevant to participatory health and the balance between data sharing and patient needs for privacy and confidentiality. After identifying the relevant domain areas, our scoping review began by searching several databases such as PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Google Scholar using a variety of key search terms.

resultsA total of 1,973 studies were identified, of which 68 studies met our inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Results showed that challenges for balancing patient needs for information and privacy and confidentiality concerns included: cross-cultural understanding, clinician and patient awareness, de-identification of data, and commercialization of patient data. Some opportunities identified were patient empowerment, connecting participatory health enabling technologies with clinical records, open data sharing agreement, and e-consent.

conclusionBalancing between privacy and patient needs for health information in the age of participatory health and social media offers several opportunities and challenges. More people are engaging in actively managing health through participatory health enabling technologies. Such activity often includes sharing health information and with this comes a perennial tension between balancing individual needs and the desire to uphold privacy and confidentiality. We recommend that guidelines for both patients and clinicians, in terms of their use of participatory health-enabling technologies, are developed to ensure that patient privacy and confidentiality are protected, and a maximum benefit can be realized.

Indexed as

ConfidentialityHealth Records, PersonalPatient ParticipationPrivacySocial MediaData AnonymizationElectronic Health RecordsHumansInternetMedical InformaticsSocieties, Medical

Identifiers

PMID29681040
PMCPMC6115243

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.