Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31389335›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2019

Why Do Data Users Say Health Care Data Are Difficult to Use? A Cross-Sectional Survey Study.

Ho Heon Kim, Bora Kim, Segyeong Joo, Soo-Yong Shin, Hyo Soung Cha, Yu Rang Park

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

6 authors.

Ho Heon Kim *Department of Biomedical Systems Informatics, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-7260-7504
Bora Kim *Emphasis Information Technology Inc, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-1021-1106
Segyeong Joo *Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-1681-3845
Soo-Yong ShinDepartment of Digital Health, Samsung Advanced Institute for Health Sciences & Technology, SungKyunKwan University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-2410-6120
Hyo Soung ChaCancer Big Data Center, National Cancer Center, Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-0537-8355
Yu Rang ParkDepartment of Biomedical Systems Informatics, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-4210-2094

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere has been significant effort in attempting to use health care data. However, laws that protect patients' privacy have restricted data use because health care data contain sensitive information. Thus, discussions on privacy laws now focus on the active use of health care data beyond protection. However, current literature does not clarify the obstacles that make data usage and deidentification processes difficult or elaborate on users' needs for data linking from practical perspectives.

objectiveThe objective of this study is to investigate (1) the current status of data use in each medical area, (2) institutional efforts and difficulties in deidentification processes, and (3) users' data linking needs.

methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional online survey. To recruit people who have used health care data, we publicized the promotion campaign and sent official documents to an academic society encouraging participation in the online survey.

resultsIn total, 128 participants responded to the online survey; 10 participants were excluded for either inconsistent responses or lack of demand for health care data. Finally, 118 participants' responses were analyzed. The majority of participants worked in general hospitals or universities (62/118, 52.5% and 51/118, 43.2%, respectively, multiple-choice answers). More than half of participants responded that they have a need for clinical data (82/118, 69.5%) and public data (76/118, 64.4%). Furthermore, 85.6% (101/118) of respondents conducted deidentification measures when using data, and they considered rigid social culture as an obstacle for deidentification (28/101, 27.7%). In addition, they required data linking (98/118, 83.1%), and they noted deregulation and data standardization to allow access to health care data linking (33/98, 33.7% and 38/98, 38.8%, respectively). There were no significant differences in the proportion of responded data needs and linking in groups that used health care data for either public purposes or commercial purposes.

conclusionsThis study provides a cross-sectional view from a practical, user-oriented perspective on the kinds of data users want to utilize, efforts and difficulties in deidentification processes, and the needs for data linking. Most users want to use clinical and public data, and most participants conduct deidentification processes and express a desire to conduct data linking. Our study confirmed that they noted regulation as a primary obstacle whether their purpose is commercial or public. A legal system based on both data utilization and data protection needs is required.

Indexed as

Access to InformationCommunication BarriersComputer SecurityDatabases, FactualAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansInternetMaleMiddle AgedRepublic of KoreaSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adultdata anonymizationdata linkingdata protectiondata sharinghealth care data demandprivacy act

Identifiers

PMID31389335
PMCPMC6701164

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.