ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2019
A two-site survey of medical center personnel's willingness to share clinical data for research: implications for reproducible health NLP research.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Measuring the willingness to share personal health information: a systematic review.Frontiers in public health · 2023Pooled it
- Characteristics of Participants Who Consented to Share Data with a Public Health Registry After an Environmental Disaster.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- The Impact of Trust and the Role of the Opt-Out Mechanism in Willingness to Share Health Data via Electronic Health Records in Germany: Telephone Survey Study.JMIR human factors · 2025Article
- Health data sharing in Germany: individual preconditions, trust and motives.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- The views, perspectives, and experiences of academic researchers with data sharing and reuse: A meta-synthesis.PloS one · 2020Article
- Connected Health User Willingness to Share Personal Health Data: Questionnaire Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2019Article
- Crowdsourcing Public Opinion for Sharing Medical Records for the Advancement of Science.Studies in health technology and informatics · 2019Article
- Special issue of BMC medical informatics and decision making on health natural language processing.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2019Article
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
backgroundA shareable repository of clinical notes is critical for advancing natural language processing (NLP) research, and therefore a goal of many NLP researchers is to create a shareable repository of clinical notes, that has breadth (from multiple institutions) as well as depth (as much individual data as possible).
methodsWe aimed to assess the degree to which individuals would be willing to contribute their health data to such a repository. A compact e-survey probed willingness to share demographic and clinical data categories. Participants were faculty, staff, and students in two geographically diverse major medical centers (Utah and New York). Such a sample could be expected to respond like a typical potential participant from the general public who is given complete and fully informed consent about the pros and cons of participating in a research study.
resultsTwo thousand one hundred forty respondents completed the surveys. 56% of respondents were "somewhat/definitely willing" to share clinical data with identifiers, while 89% of respondents were "somewhat (17%)/definitely willing (72%)" to share without identifiers. Results were consistent across gender, age, and education, but there were some differences by geographical region. Individuals were most reluctant (50-74%) sharing mental health, substance abuse, and domestic violence data.
conclusionsWe conclude that a substantial fraction of potential patient participants, once educated about risks and benefits, would be willing to donate de-identified clinical data to a shared research repository. A slight majority even would be willing to share absent de-identification, suggesting that perceptions about data misuse are not a major concern. Such a repository of clinical notes should be invaluable for clinical NLP research and advancement.
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.