SynthesisFrontiers in digital health2024
Navigating the wild west: a review of guidance on clinical communications using personal BYOD, IM and third-party apps in the UK and Ireland.
Synthesis in Frontiers in digital health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The ubiquity of Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) personal smartphones, Instant Messaging (IM), and third-party apps, has made these technologies compelling for efficient communications between clinicians regarding patient care. However, the sensitivity of patient-related information necessitates secure, GDPR compliant modalities that prevent unauthorised access and ensure confidentiality. This scoping review explores existing guidelines, policies, and regulations that advise clinicians in the UK and Ireland on the secure use of these digital communication tools. Methods: Following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) updated Framework for Scoping Reviews and the PRISMA ScR guidelines, this review examines the literature to identify relevant guidelines, policies, and regulations informing current clinical practice on the use of this technology. Academic databases including OneSearch, Embase, EBSCO, PubMed, Medline, and CINAHL were searched, in addition to hand searches of professional entities' websites, including trade unions, regulators, two national health systems, and several employers. Direct inquiries were made to 69 professional entities via telephone, email, websites, and X (formerly known as Twitter). Results: The review identified 18 papers that broadly recognise the importance of secure communication however, a lack of information on the appropriate selection or configuration of these popular technologies was evident. Most guidelines emphasise general security and data protection standards rather than providing clear actionable recommendations for technology use, thereby leaving a significant gap in technical guidance for clinicians. Discussion: There is a distinct lack of detailed, specific, consistent technical guidance available to clinicians. This review evidences an urgent requirement for enhanced guidelines that specify the most secure platforms, appropriate features, and configuration to maximise the security and confidentiality of clinical communications. Further research is recommended to develop comprehensive, actionable advice for clinicians.
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.