ArticleEClinicalMedicine2024
Health data sharing attitudes towards primary and secondary use of data: a systematic review.
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
42 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Barriers impeding research data sharing on chronic disease prevention among the older adults in low-and middle-income countries: a systematic review.Frontiers in public health · 2024Pooled 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
- Your DNA, your concerns: public attitudes toward donation of genomic data for research in four Latin American countries.Journal of community genetics · 2026Article
- Ethical Governance of Open Data Across Biomedical Research, Healthcare, and Public Health: Privacy, Equity, Trust, and Controlled Access.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2026Article
- Personal Influenza Vaccination and Willingness to Receive Vaccination in Community Pharmacies Among Pharmacists and Family Physicians in Northwestern Romania: A Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- What is the problem and what can be done when data sharing challenges public legitimacy?Nature communications · 2026Article
- Patients' and Providers' Attitudes Toward Artificial Intelligence and Electronic Health Record Use in Deep Phenotyping and Rare-Disease Screening: An Empty Systematic Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Operationalizing transparency regarding the use of health data for research: a cross-sectional survey of citizens' perspectives.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Addressing Data Quality Challenges in Lung Cancer Data Within the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Common Data Model: Observational Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Observational
- High Patient Willingness to Grant Broad Consent for Real-World Data Use in Rheumatology-Implications for Real-World Data Platform Governance: Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Digital Literacy and Interpersonal Trust as Predictors of Willingness to Share Patient-Generated Health Data Among Korean Internet Users: Cross-Sectional Study Using Privacy Calculus and Communication Privacy Management Theories.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Toward a Common Set of Interface Requirements for Genomic Data Management: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Perspectives on Health Data Sharing Among Patients With Somatic and Mental Health Diseases: Focus Group Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Strengthening public health data governance: A Co-regulatory framework for integrating wearable health data into health systems.Journal of public health research · 2026Article
- What patients value in data reuse for oncology research: a multi-stakeholder qualitative study to inform the European Health Data Space implementation in Belgium and beyond.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2026Article
- Development and Evaluation of SNOMED CT Automated Mapping Tool: Advancing Terminology Standardization and Semantic Interoperability.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Explainable and secure federated learning for privacy-enhancing skin cancer classification using a lightweight multi-scale CNN.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Knowledge attitude and practice of privacy protection in mobile phone use among psychiatric inpatients.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Acceptability of Sharing Internet Browsing History for Cancer Research: Think-Aloud and Interview Study.JMIR cancer · 2026Article
- Implementing broad consent for research with routinely collected clinical data and residual biosamples in a cancer hospital: using mixed methods approach to evaluate consent rates and patients' perspectives.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To receive the best care, people share their health data (HD) with their health practitioners (known as sharing HD for primary purposes). However, during the past two decades, sharing for other (i.e., secondary) purposes has become of great importance in numerous fields, including public health, personalized medicine, research, and development. We aimed to conduct the first comprehensive overview of all studies that investigated people's HD sharing attitudes-along with associated barriers/motivators and significant influencing factors-for all data types and across both primary and secondary uses. Methods: We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, EMBASE, and CINAHL for relevant studies published in English between database inception and February 28, 2023, using a predefined set of keywords. Studies were included, regardless of their design, if they reported outcomes related to attitudes towards sharing HD. We extracted key data from the included studies, including the type of HD involved and findings related to: HD sharing attitudes (either in general or depending on type of data/user); barriers/motivators/benefits/concerns of the study participants; and sociodemographic and other variables that could impact HD sharing behaviour. The qualitative synthesis was conducted by dividing the studies according to the data type (resulting in five subgroups) as well as the purpose the data sharing was focused on (primary, secondary or both). The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of non-randomised studies. This work was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42023413822. Findings: Of 2109 studies identified through our search, 116 were included in the qualitative synthesis, yielding a total of 228,501 participants and various types of HD represented: person-generated HD (n = 17 studies and 10,771 participants), personal HD in general (n = 69 studies and 117,054 participants), Biobank data (n = 7 studies and 27,073 participants), genomic data (n = 13 studies and 54,716 participants), and miscellaneous data (n = 10 studies and 18,887 participants). The majority of studies had a moderate level of quality (83 [71.6%] of 116 studies), but varying levels of quality were observed across the included studies. Overall, studies suggest that sharing intentions for primary purposes were observed to be high regardless of data type, and it was higher than sharing intentions for secondary purposes. Sharing for secondary purposes yielded variable findings, where both the highest and the lowest intention rates were observed in the case of studies that explored sharing biobank data (98% and 10%, respectively). Several influencing factors on sharing intentions were identified, such as the type of data recipient, data, consent. Further, concerns related to data sharing that were found to be mutual for all data types included privacy, security, and data access/control, while the perceived benefits included those related to improvements in healthcare. Findings regarding attitudes towards sharing varied significantly across sociodemographic factors and depended on data type and type of use. In most cases, these findings were derived from single studies and therefore warrant confirmations from additional studies. Interpretation: Sharing health data is a complex issue that is influenced by various factors (the type of health data, the intended use, the data recipient, among others) and these insights could be used to overcome barriers, address people's concerns, and focus on spreading awareness about the data sharing process and benefits. Funding: None.
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.