Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34127076›Full record

ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2021

Perceptions of anonymised data use and awareness of the NHS data opt-out amongst patients, carers and healthcare staff.

C Atkin, B Crosby, K Dunn, G Price, E Marston, C Crawford, M O'Hara, C Morgan, M Levermore, S Gallier and 11 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  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
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

21 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

C AtkinPIONEER Hub in Acute Care, Institute of Inflammation and Ageing, University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2GW, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0596-8515
B CrosbyPIONEER HDR-UK Data Hub in Acute Care, Institute of Inflammation and Ageing, University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2GW, UK.
K DunnHDR-UK Midlands Physical Site, University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2GW, UK.
G PricePatient Involvement and Engagement Lead, PIONEER, London, UK.
E MarstonResearch Support Services, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.
C CrawfordResearch and Development, University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2GW, UK.
M O'HaraUniversity Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2GW, UK.
C MorganPublic author, B15 2GW, Birmingham, UK.
M LevermoreMedical Devices Technology International Limited (MDTi), The KaCe Building, Victoria Passage, Wolverhampton, West Midlands, WV1 4LG, UK.
S GallierTechnical Director, PIONEER HDR-UK Data Hub in Acute Care, Institute of Inflammation and Ageing, University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2GW, UK.
S ModhwadiaPIONEER HDR-UK Data Hub in Acute Care, University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2GW, UK.
J AttwoodInformatics, University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2GW, UK.
S PerksInformatics, University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2GW, UK.
A K DennistonDirector of INSIGHT - the Health Data Research Hub for Eye Health, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2GW, UK.
G GkoutosAlan Turing Institute, HDR-UK Associated Researcher, Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2GW, UK.
R DormerInsignia Medical Systems Limited, Paterson House, Hatch Warren Lane, Basingstoke, Hampshire, RG22 4RA, UK.
A RosserWest Midlands Ambulance Service Foundation Trust, Millennium Point, Waterfront Business Park, Waterfront Way, Brierley Hill, West Midlands, DY5 1LX, UK.
A IgnatowiczInstitute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.
H FanningResearch and Development, University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2GW, UK.
E SapeyPIONEER, HDR-UK Health Data Research Hub in Acute Care, Birmingham Acute Care Research Group, Institute of Inflammation and Ageing, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2GW, UK. e.sapey@bham.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3454-5482
PIONEER Data Hub
University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Birmingham · GBBirmingham City University · GBEast Midlands Ambulance Service NHS Trust · GBTuring Institute · GB

Funding

HDR-UK PIONEER 2019Medical Research Council MC_PC_19005Medical Research Council MC_PC_21015Medical Research Council MR/L008335/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEngland operates a National Data Opt-Out (NDOO) for the secondary use of confidential health data for research and planning. We hypothesised that public awareness and support for the secondary use of health data and the NDOO would vary by participant demography and healthcare experience. We explored patient/public awareness and perceptions of secondary data use, grouping potential researchers into National Health Service (NHS), academia or commercial. We assessed awareness of the NDOO system amongst patients, carers, healthcare staff and the public. We co-developed recommendations to consider when sharing unconsented health data for research.

methodsA patient and public engagement program, co-created and including patient and public workshops, questionnaires and discussion groups regarding anonymised health data use.

resultsThere were 350 participants in total. Central concerns for health data use included unauthorised data re-use, the potential for discrimination and data sharing without patient benefit. 94% of respondents were happy for their data to be used for NHS research, 85% for academic research and 68% by health companies, but less than 50% for non-healthcare companies and opinions varied with demography and participant group. Questionnaires showed that knowledge of the NDOO was low, with 32% of all respondents, 53% of all NHS staff and 29% of all patients aware of the NDOO. Recommendations to guide unconsented secondary health data use included that health data use should benefit patients; data sharing decisions should involve patients/public. That data should remain in close proximity to health services with the principles of data minimisation applied. Further, that there should be transparency in secondary health data use, including publicly available lists of projects, summaries and benefits. Finally, organisations involved in data access decisions should participate in programmes to increase knowledge of the NDOO, to ensure public members were making informed choices about their own data.

conclusionThe majority of participants in this study reported that the use of healthcare data for secondary purposes was acceptable when accessed by NHS. Academic and health-focused companies. However, awareness was limited, including of the NDOO. Further development of publicly-agreed recommendations for secondary health data use may improve both awareness and confidence in secondary health data use.

Indexed as

Anonymised healthcare dataCommercialData sharingNational Data opt-outSecondary data use

Identifiers

PMID34127076
PMCPMC8201435
OpenAlexW3173040475

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.