ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2021
Secondary Use of Clinical Data in Data-Gathering, Non-Interventional Research or Learning Activities: Definition, Types, and a Framework for Risk Assessment.
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 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Addressing Data Quality Challenges in Lung Cancer Data Within the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Common Data Model: Observational Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Observational
- Integrating Health Care Data in an Informatics for Integrating Biology & the Bedside (i2b2) Model Persisted Through Elasticsearch: Design, Implementation, and Evaluation in a French University Hospital.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Article
- Patient data for commercial companies? An ethical framework for sharing patients' data with for-profit companies for research.Journal of medical ethics · 2025Article
- [Re-identification potential of structured health data].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2024Review
- Review
- Patient-reported perioperative anaesthesia-related anxiety is associated with impaired patient satisfaction: a secondary analysis from a prospective observational study in Switzerland.Scientific reports · 2023Observational
- An Ontology-Based Approach for Consolidating Patient Data Standardized With European Norm/International Organization for Standardization 13606 (EN/ISO 13606) Into Joint Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) Repositories: Description of a Methodology.JMIR medical informatics · 2023Article
- Patients' Willingness to Provide Their Clinical Data for Research Purposes and Acceptance of Different Consent Models: Findings From a Representative Survey of Patients With Cancer.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe secondary use of clinical data in data-gathering, non-interventional research or learning activities (SeConts) has great potential for scientific progress and health care improvement. At the same time, it poses relevant risks for the privacy and informational self-determination of patients whose data are used.
objectiveSince the current literature lacks a tailored framework for risk assessment in SeConts as well as a clarification of the concept and practical scope of SeConts, we aim to fill this gap.
methodsIn this study, we analyze each element of the concept of SeConts to provide a synthetic definition, investigate the practical relevance and scope of SeConts through a literature review, and operationalize the widespread definition of risk (as a harmful event of a certain magnitude that occurs with a certain probability) to conduct a tailored analysis of privacy risk factors typically implied in SeConts.
resultsWe offer a conceptual clarification and definition of SeConts and provide a list of types of research and learning activities that can be subsumed under the definition of SeConts. We also offer a proposal for the classification of SeConts types into the categories non-interventional (observational) clinical research, quality control and improvement, or public health research. In addition, we provide a list of risk factors that determine the probability or magnitude of harm implied in SeConts. The risk factors provide a framework for assessing the privacy-related risks for patients implied in SeConts. We illustrate the use of risk assessment by applying it to a concrete example.
conclusionsIn the future, research ethics committees and data use and access committees will be able to rely on and apply the framework offered here when reviewing projects of secondary use of clinical data for learning and research purposes.
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.