Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38904994›Full record

ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2024

Medical Information Protection in Internet Hospital Apps in China: Scale Development and Content Analysis.

Jiayi Jiang, Zexing Zheng

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

2 authors.

Jiayi JiangLaw School, Central South University, Changsha, China.ORCID 0000-0003-0673-848X
Zexing ZhengLaw School, Central South University, Changsha, China.ORCID 0000-0002-9906-4754

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHospital apps are increasingly being adopted in many countries, especially since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Web-based hospitals can provide valuable medical services and enhanced accessibility. However, increasing concerns about personal information (PI) and strict legal compliance requirements necessitate privacy assessments for these platforms. Guided by the theory of contextual integrity, this study investigates the regulatory compliance of privacy policies for internet hospital apps in the mainland of China.

objectiveIn this paper, we aim to evaluate the regulatory compliance of privacy policies of internet hospital apps in the mainland of China and offer recommendations for improvement.

methodsWe obtained 59 internet hospital apps on November 7, 2023, and reviewed 52 privacy policies available between November 8 and 23, 2023. We developed a 3-level indicator scale based on the information processing activities, as stipulated in relevant regulations. The scale comprised 7 level-1 indicators, 26 level-2 indicators, and 70 level-3 indicators.

resultsThe mean compliance score of the 52 assessed apps was 73/100 (SD 22.4%), revealing a varied spectrum of compliance. Sensitive PI protection compliance (mean 73.9%, SD 24.2%) lagged behind general PI protection (mean 90.4%, SD 14.7%), with only 12 apps requiring separate consent for processing sensitive PI (mean 73.9%, SD 24.2%). Although most apps (n=41, 79%) committed to supervising subcontractors, only a quarter (n=13, 25%) required users' explicit consent for subcontracting activities. Concerning PI storage security (mean 71.2%, SD 29.3%) and incident management (mean 71.8%, SD 36.6%), half of the assessed apps (n=27, 52%) committed to bear corresponding legal responsibility, whereas fewer than half (n=24, 46%) specified the security level obtained. Most privacy policies stated the PI retention period (n=40, 77%) and instances of PI deletion or anonymization (n=41, 79%), but fewer (n=20, 38.5%) committed to prompt third-party PI deletion. Most apps delineated various individual rights, but only a fraction addressed the rights to obtain copies (n=22, 42%) or to refuse advertisement based on automated decision-making (n=13, 25%). Significant deficiencies remained in regular compliance audits (mean 11.5%, SD 37.8%), impact assessments (mean 13.5%, SD 15.2%), and PI officer disclosure (mean 48.1%, SD 49.3%).

conclusionsOur analysis revealed both strengths and significant shortcomings in the compliance of internet hospital apps' privacy policies with relevant regulations. As China continues to implement internet hospital apps, it should ensure the informed consent of users for PI processing activities, enhance compliance levels of relevant privacy policies, and fortify PI protection enforcement across the information processing stages.

Indexed as

Mobile ApplicationsChinaComputer SecurityConfidentialityCOVID-19HumansInternetPandemicscontent analysishospital appspersonal information protectionpolicy evaluationprivacy policy

Identifiers

PMID38904994
PMCPMC11226934

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.