Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36719719›Full record

ArticleJMIR cancer2023

Policy Preferences Regarding Health Data Sharing Among Patients With Cancer: Public Deliberations.

Minakshi Raj, Kerry Ryan, Philip Sahr Amara, Paige Nong, Karen Calhoun, M Grace Trinidad, Daniel Thiel, Kayte Spector-Bagdady, Raymond De Vries, Sharon Kardia and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR cancer, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Building trust: public priorities for health care AI labeling.The American journal of managed care · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

11 authors.

Minakshi RajDepartment of Kinesiology and Community Health, University of Illinois Urbana Champaign, Champaign, IL, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1457-7850
Kerry RyanCenter for Bioethics and Social Sciences in Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0582-3693
Philip Sahr AmaraDepartment of Learning Health Sciences, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8544-3884
Paige NongDepartment of Health Management and Policy, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2849-9005
Karen CalhounMichigan Institute for Clinical & Health Research, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5011-9718
M Grace TrinidadNational Hemophilia Program Coordinating Center, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0615-767X
Daniel ThielLyman Briggs College, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7949-5496
Kayte Spector-BagdadyCenter for Bioethics and Social Sciences in Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5851-6224
Raymond De VriesCenter for Bioethics and Social Sciences in Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3087-3040
Sharon KardiaSchool of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9853-3379
Jodyn PlattDepartment of Learning Health Sciences, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4902-4903

Funding

Michigan Institute for Clinical and Health Research (MICHR)UL1TR002240 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI LUMENG, JULIE C, MASHOUR, GEORGE ALEXANDER · 2017 to 2022
$54.9M
Public trust of artificial intelligence in the precision CDS health ecosystem - Administrative SupplementR01EB030492 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI PLATT, JODYN ELIZABETH · 2021 to 2024
$3.1M
The Lifecycle of Health Data: Polices and PracticesR01CA214829 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI KARDIA, SHARON L, PLATT, JODYN ELIZABETH · 2018 to 2021
$2.4M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002240NCI NIH HHS R01 CA214829NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB030492
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrecision health offers the promise of advancing clinical care in data-driven, evidence-based, and personalized ways. However, complex data sharing infrastructures, for-profit (commercial) and nonprofit partnerships, and systems for data governance have been created with little attention to the values, expectations, and preferences of patients about how they want to be engaged in the sharing and use of their health information. We solicited patient opinions about institutional policy options using public deliberation methods to address this gap.

objectiveWe aimed to understand the policy preferences of current and former patients with cancer regarding the sharing of health information collected in the contexts of health information exchange and commercial partnerships and to identify the values invoked and perceived risks and benefits of health data sharing considered by the participants when formulating their policy preferences.

methodsWe conducted 2 public deliberations, including predeliberation and postdeliberation surveys, with patients who had a current or former cancer diagnosis (n=61). Following informational presentations, the participants engaged in facilitated small-group deliberations to discuss and rank policy preferences related to health information sharing, such as the use of a patient portal, email or SMS text messaging, signage in health care settings, opting out of commercial data sharing, payment, and preservation of the status quo. The participants ranked their policy preferences individually, as small groups by mutual agreement, and then again individually in the postdeliberation survey.

resultsAfter deliberation, the patient portal was ranked as the most preferred policy choice. The participants ranked no change in status quo as the least preferred policy option by a wide margin. Throughout the study, the participants expressed concerns about transparency and awareness, convenience, and accessibility of information about health data sharing. Concerns about the status quo centered around a lack of transparency, awareness, and control. Specifically, the patients were not aware of how, when, or why their data were being used and wanted more transparency in these regards as well as greater control and autonomy around the use of their health data. The deliberations suggested that patient portals would be a good place to provide additional information about data sharing practices but that over time, notifications should be tailored to patient preferences.

conclusionsOur study suggests the need for increased disclosure of health information sharing practices. Describing health data sharing practices through patient portals or other mechanisms personalized to patient preferences would minimize the concerns expressed by patients about the extent of data sharing that occurs without their knowledge. Future research and policies should identify ways to increase patient control over health data sharing without reducing the societal benefits of data sharing.

Indexed as

data sharinghealth information exchangeprecision healthpublic deliberation

Identifiers

PMID36719719
PMCPMC9929721

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.