ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2023
Public Preferences for Digital Health Data Sharing: Discrete Choice Experiment Study in 12 European Countries.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Toward Participatory Precision Health With Co-Designed Recommendations: Systematic Review of Just-in-Time Adaptive Interventions in Adolescents and Young Adults.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- The Evolving Landscape of Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Pooled it
- Attitudes of Longitudinal Study Participants and Members of the Public Towards Data Sharing for Secondary Research: A Survey Based Approach.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2026Article
- Perspectives on Health Data Sharing Among Patients With Somatic and Mental Health Diseases: Focus Group Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Autism data sharing: Benefits, challenges, and recommendations.PLOS digital health · 2026Review
- Public Attitudes and Predictors of Public Awareness of Personal Digital Health Data Sharing for Research: Cross-Sectional Study in Japan.JMIR human factors · 2025Article
- Worldwide willingness to share health data high but privacy, consent and transparency paramount, a meta-analysis.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Sharing health data for research purposes: results of a population survey in Germany.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- A choice based conjoint analysis of mobile healthcare application preferences among physicians, patients, and individuals.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Benefits and risks of health data reuse for healthcare providers: stakeholder perspectives from a qualitative interview study.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Crisis Text Line and Loris.ai Controversy Highlights the Complexity of Informed Consent on the Internet and Data-Sharing Ethics for Machine Learning and Research.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- The European Health Data Space: an opportunity to strengthen citizen rights and engage citizens in health data governance.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Stated preferences of adolescents and young adults for sexual and reproductive health services in Africa: a systematic review protocol.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Artificial Intelligence Needs Data: Challenges Accessing Italian Databases to Train AI.Asian bioethics review · 2024Article
- Article
- Ethical framework for FACILITATE: a foundation for the return of clinical trial data to participants.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors at 13 institutions in 13 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWith new technologies, health data can be collected in a variety of different clinical, research, and public health contexts, and then can be used for a range of new purposes. Establishing the public's views about digital health data sharing is essential for policy makers to develop effective harmonization initiatives for digital health data governance at the European level.
objectiveThis study investigated public preferences for digital health data sharing.
methodsA discrete choice experiment survey was administered to a sample of European residents in 12 European countries (Austria, Denmark, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom) from August 2020 to August 2021. Respondents answered whether hypothetical situations of data sharing were acceptable for them. Each hypothetical scenario was defined by 5 attributes ("data collector," "data user," "reason for data use," "information on data sharing and consent," and "availability of review process"), which had 3 to 4 attribute levels each. A latent class model was run across the whole data set and separately for different European regions (Northern, Central, and Southern Europe). Attribute relative importance was calculated for each latent class's pooled and regional data sets.
resultsA total of 5015 completed surveys were analyzed. In general, the most important attribute for respondents was the availability of information and consent during health data sharing. In the latent class model, 4 classes of preference patterns were identified. While respondents in 2 classes strongly expressed their preferences for data sharing with opposing positions, respondents in the other 2 classes preferred not to share their data, but attribute levels of the situation could have had an impact on their preferences. Respondents generally found the following to be the most acceptable: a national authority or academic research project as the data user; being informed and asked to consent; and a review process for data transfer and use, or transfer only. On the other hand, collection of their data by a technological company and data use for commercial communication were the least acceptable. There was preference heterogeneity across Europe and within European regions.
conclusionsThis study showed the importance of transparency in data use and oversight of health-related data sharing for European respondents. Regional and intraregional preference heterogeneity for "data collector," "data user," "reason," "type of consent," and "review" calls for governance solutions that would grant data subjects the ability to control their digital health data being shared within different contexts. These results suggest that the use of data without consent will demand weighty and exceptional reasons. An interactive and dynamic informed consent model combined with oversight mechanisms may be a solution for policy initiatives aiming to harmonize health data use across Europe.
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.