ReviewCureus2022
Health Records Database and Inherent Security Concerns: A Review of the Literature.
Review in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 101 citations in OpenAlex.
- Person-Centered Technology for Older Adults: Benefits, Limitations, and Considerations in Design and Use.Journal of applied gerontology : the official journal of the Southern Gerontological Society · 2026Article
- Unlocking multi-institutional insights into disease progression with PEAL as a lossless, one-shot federated learning solution.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Privacy concerns regarding personal health information in Myanmar: A cross-sectional survey in a least developed country.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Healthcare stakeholders' perspectives on coordinating cancer diagnosis in Chile, Colombia, and Ecuador.Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2026Article
- Assessing Information Confidentiality in Telemedicine Platforms Using Public Web Data: A Case Study of Persian Televisit Websites.Iranian journal of medical sciences · 2025Observational
- Are 10-Year-Old Imaging Tests Likely to Be Useful or Can They Be Purged?Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2025Article
- Bridging Global Frameworks and Local Practice: Quantitative Evaluation of Electronic Health Record Safety in Kuwait's Public Hospitals.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Article
- Development and Evaluation of Clinical Decision Support for Immigrant Child Health Screening in Primary Care.Applied clinical informatics · 2025Article
- Recent Advances in Urinometers: Enhancing Monitoring of Urine Output, pH, and Color: A Narrative Review.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2025Review
- Telemedicine and Digital Tools in Dentistry: Enhancing Diagnosis and Remote Patient Care.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- Connected Healthcare System Technology Interventions to Improve Patient Safety by Reducing Medical Errors: A Systematic Review.Global journal on quality and safety in healthcare · 2025Review
- Privacy preserving strategies for electronic health records in the era of large language models.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- GPT, ontology, and CAABAC: A tripartite personalized access control model anchored by compliance, context and attribute.PloS one · 2025Article
- Challenges of data quality for the management of prostate cancer in Tanzania: A hurdle towards improving the quality of service.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Unintended Consequences of Data Sharing Under the Meaningful Use Program.JMIR medical informatics · 2024Article
- Patient Health Record Protection Beyond the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act: Mixed Methods Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- AI-Reinforced Wearable Sensors and Intelligent Point-of-Care Tests.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Review
- Article
- Review
- Evaluating Large Language Model (LLM) Performance on Established Breast Classification Systems.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of electronic health records (EHRs) has grown significantly in the past decade. Health information databases contain sensitive patient information, including their names and addresses, tests, diagnoses, treatment, and medical history. This information should be secured and protected from manipulation and fraudulent use by third parties. EHRs are expected to increase efficiency in healthcare delivery, improve healthcare quality, and relieve increased financial pressure. Despite these expected benefits, EHRs are potentially vulnerable to security concerns that may affect the confidentiality and privacy of patients' personal information. This paper presents a literature review of EHRs, factors that support the security and safety of health records, potential security breaches, and solutions to inherent security concerns. The study collects data through a systematic review of past studies that have addressed the topic of EHRs and security issues, and other relevant publications on EHR systems, and procedures that help safeguard health records databases. A total of 30 sources are analyzed for all pertinent information regarding security concerns of health records databases. These sources were obtained through an internet search on credible databases, including Google Scholar, PubMed, and CINAHL databases. The results of the current study reveal the perceived vulnerability of EHRs to security concerns, common security issues, the nature of these common security concerns, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act rules, provider responsibilities, and recommendations for reducing EHR security risks. This paper also reveals effective strategies such as privacy-protection awareness and staff training to enhance the security of health records databases.
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.