Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37041588›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2023

Exploring patient perspectives on the secondary use of their personal health information: an interview study.

Rosie Dobson, Helen Wihongi, Robyn Whittaker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

3 authors.

Rosie DobsonSchool of Population Health, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. r.dobson@auckland.ac.nz.
Helen WihongiTe Whatu Ora Waitematā, Auckland, New Zealand.
Robyn WhittakerSchool of Population Health, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe increased digitalisation of health records has resulted in increased opportunities for the secondary use of health information for advancing healthcare. Understanding how patients want their health information used is vital to ensure health services use it in an appropriate and patient-informed manner. The aim of this study was to explore patient perceptions of the use of their health information beyond their immediate care.

methodsSemi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with current users of health services in Aotearoa New Zealand. Different scenarios formed the basis of the discussions in the interviews covering different types of information use (current practice, artificial intelligence and machine learning, clinical calculators, research, registries, and public health surveillance). Transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis.

resultsTwelve interviews were conducted with individual's representative of key ethnicity groups and rural/urban populations, and at the time of recruitment, had been accessing a diverse range of health services. Participants ranged from high users of health care (e.g., weekly dialysis) through to low users (e.g., one-off presentation to the emergency department). Four interrelated overarching themes were identified from the transcripts describing the main issues for participants: helping others, sharing of data is important, trust, and respect.

conclusionsPeople currently engaging with health services are supportive of their health information being used to help others, advance science, and contribute to the greater good but their support is conditional. People need to be able to trust the health service to protect, care for, and respect their health information and ensure no harm comes from its use. This study has identified key considerations for services and researchers to reflect on when using patient health information for secondary purposes to ensure they use it in a patient-informed way.

trial registrationNA.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceHealth Records, PersonalDelivery of Health CareHumansNew ZealandQualitative ResearchConsumer perspectivesData sharingHealth information

Identifiers

PMID37041588
PMCPMC10088161

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.