SynthesisSystematic reviews2020
A systematic literature review of health consumer attitudes towards secondary use and sharing of health administrative and clinical trial data: a focus on privacy, trust, and transparency.
Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 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
39 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Implementing electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Chronic Kidney Disease: a qualitative systematic review of barriers, enablers, and mechanisms.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2026Pooled it
- Patient and Public Willingness to Share Personal Health Data for Third-Party or Secondary Uses: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Pooled it
- Attitudes of Longitudinal Study Participants and Members of the Public Towards Data Sharing for Secondary Research: A Survey Based Approach.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2026Article
- Budesonide and Surfactant Therapy Versus Surfactant Alone on Incidence of Lung Disease in Preterm Infants (BEST Lung): Study Protocol for a Systematic Review and Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis With Nested Prospective Meta-Analysis.Acta paediatrica (Oslo, Norway : 1992) · 2026Article
- Operationalizing transparency regarding the use of health data for research: a cross-sectional survey of citizens' perspectives.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Accuracy of administrative data in ascertaining health conditions: a systematic review.JAMIA open · 2026Review
- Men's perceptions of long-term health outcomes following fertility problems: a UK-based mixed-methods survey.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026Article
- Ethical Responsibility in Medical AI: A Semi-Systematic Thematic Review and Multilevel Governance Model.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Implementing broad consent for research with routinely collected clinical data and residual biosamples in a cancer hospital: using mixed methods approach to evaluate consent rates and patients' perspectives.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Navigating open data sharing and privacy in the age of clinical AI research: from reidentification to pseudo-reidentification.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Review
- Developing a Data Trust Model (Not Only) for Sleep Research: Conceptual Study and Quantitative Survey.JMIR human factors · 2025Article
- Protecting patient privacy in tabular synthetic health data: a regulatory perspective.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Review
- Opportunities and risks associated with external comparator cohorts in clinical drug development in hematology.Blood cancer journal · 2025Article
- Data Sharing, Biopsies and Patient Confidentiality in a Precision Medicine Trial for Childhood Cancer: A Mixed Method Study of Parents, Oncologists, and Scientists' Perspectives.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Article
- U.S. Vietnamese Parents' Perceptions of Different Approaches for Confirming Adolescent HPV Vaccination Records in Research Studies.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- An empirical assessment of differential privacy in real-world observational data: a case-control study of asthma exacerbation in UK Biobank linked with electronic health records.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025Article
- If it wasn't for us, there would be no data: stakeholders' perspectives on patient involvement in the use of health data in Ireland.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- I don't mind my information going to the Moon, but I don't want any letters from Mars: a qualitative exploration of the challenges with secondary use of health data in Ireland.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025Article
- Sharing data matters: exploring the attitudes of older consumers on an emerging healthy ageing data platform using electronic health records for research.BMJ health & care informatics · 2025Article
- Placing conditions on sharing general practice data for research: Recommendations from two community juries.International journal of population data science · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We aimed to synthesise data on issues related to stakeholder perceptions of privacy, trust, and transparency in use of secondary data. A systematic literature review of healthcare consumer attitudes towards the secondary use and sharing of health administrative and clinical trial data was conducted. EMBASE/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, PubMed, CINAHL, Informit Health Collection, PROSPERO Database of Systematic Reviews, PsycINFO, and ProQuest databases were searched. Eligible articles included those reporting qualitative or quantitative original research and published in English. No restrictions were placed on publication dates, study design or disease setting. One author screened articles for eligibility, and two authors were involved in the full text review process. Data was extracted using a pre-piloted data extraction template by one author and checked by another. Conflicts were resolved by consensus. Quality and bias were assessed using the QualSyst criteria for qualitative and quantitative studies. This paper focuses on a subset of 35 articles identified from the wider search which focus on issues of privacy, trust, and transparency. Studies included a total of 56,365 respondents. Results of this systematic literature review indicate that while respondents identified advantages in sharing health data, concerns relating to trust, transparency, and privacy remain. Organisations collecting health data and those who seek to share data or undertake secondary data analysis should continue to develop trust, transparency, and privacy with healthcare consumers through open dialogue and education. Consideration should be given to these issues at all stages of data collection including the conception, design, and implementation phases. While individuals understand the benefits of health data sharing for research purposes, ensuring a balance between public benefit and individual privacy is essential. Researchers and those undertaking secondary data analysis need to be cognisant of these key issues at all stages of their research. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO registration number CRD42018110559 (update June 2020).
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.