Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33616532›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2021

Opening a "Can of Worms" to Explore the Public's Hopes and Fears About Health Care Data Sharing: Qualitative Study.

Olivia Lounsbury, Lily Roberts, Jonathan R Goodman, Philippa Batey, Lenny Naar, Kelsey M Flott, Anna Lawrence-Jones, Saira Ghafur, Ara Darzi, Ana Luisa Neves

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

10 authors.

Olivia Lounsbury *Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Institute of Global Health Innovation, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0906-0339
Lily Roberts *Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Institute of Global Health Innovation, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0785-4634
Jonathan R GoodmanPatient Safety Translational Research Centre, Institute of Global Health Innovation, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-8217-364X
Philippa BateyThe Helix Centre, Institute of Global Health Innovation, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-6108-2973
Lenny NaarThe Helix Centre, Institute of Global Health Innovation, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-1419-7364
Kelsey M FlottPatient Safety Translational Research Centre, Institute of Global Health Innovation, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7835-4322
Anna Lawrence-JonesPatient Safety Translational Research Centre, Institute of Global Health Innovation, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7975-1346
Saira GhafurCentre for Health Policy, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-4487-6904
Ara DarziPatient Safety Translational Research Centre, Institute of Global Health Innovation, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-7815-7989
Ana Luisa NevesPatient Safety Translational Research Centre, Institute of Global Health Innovation, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7107-7211

Funding

British Heart Foundation
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvidence suggests that health care data sharing may strengthen care coordination, improve quality and safety, and reduce costs. However, to achieve efficient and meaningful adoption of health care data-sharing initiatives, it is necessary to engage all stakeholders, from health care professionals to patients. Although previous work has assessed health care professionals' perceptions of data sharing, perspectives of the general public and particularly of seldom heard groups have yet to be fully assessed.

objectiveThis study aims to explore the views of the public, particularly their hopes and concerns, around health care data sharing.

methodsAn original, immersive public engagement interactive experience was developed-The Can of Worms installation-in which participants were prompted to reflect about data sharing through listening to individual stories around health care data sharing. A multidisciplinary team with expertise in research, public involvement, and human-centered design developed this concept. The installation took place in three separate events between November 2018 and November 2019. A combination of convenience and snowball sampling was used in this study. Participants were asked to fill self-administered feedback cards and to describe their hopes and fears about the meaningful use of data in health care. The transcripts were compiled verbatim and systematically reviewed by four independent reviewers using the thematic analysis method to identify emerging themes.

resultsOur approach exemplifies the potential of using interdisciplinary expertise in research, public involvement, and human-centered design to tell stories, collect perspectives, and spark conversations around complex topics in participatory digital medicine. A total of 352 qualitative feedback cards were collected, each reflecting participants' hopes and fears for health care data sharing. Thematic analyses identified six themes under hopes: enablement of personal access and ownership, increased interoperability and collaboration, generation of evidence for better and safer care, improved timeliness and efficiency, delivery of more personalized care, and equality. The five main fears identified included inadequate security and exploitation, data inaccuracy, distrust, discrimination and inequality, and less patient-centered care.

conclusionsThis study sheds new light on the main hopes and fears of the public regarding health care data sharing. Importantly, our results highlight novel concerns from the public, particularly in terms of the impact on health disparities, both at international and local levels, and on delivering patient-centered care. Incorporating the knowledge generated and focusing on co-designing solutions to tackle these concerns is critical to engage the public as active contributors and to fully leverage the potential of health care data use.

Indexed as

AdultData AnalysisFearFemaleHumansInformation DisseminationMalePatient-Centered CarePatient ParticipationQualitative Researchdata securitydata sharingelectronic health recordspatient participationpatient safety

Identifiers

PMID33616532
PMCPMC7939935

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.