Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41925702›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2026

Ethical Handling of Occupational Health and Safety Data in the Fire Service: Empirical Interview and Focus Group Study of Firefighter and Fire Service Leadership Privacy Preferences.

Rachel J Topazian, Aleksandra Wec, Joseph Ali, Shannon Frattaroli, Cassandra K Crifasi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Rachel J TopazianDivision of General Internal Medicine, Center for Bioethics and Humanities, University of Colorado, 13080 E. 19th Ave, Mail Stop B137, Aurora, CO, 80045, United States, 1 303-724-6392.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7443-4595
Aleksandra WecDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6382-3678
Joseph AliDepartment of International Health and Berman Institute of Bioethics, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4767-2512
Shannon FrattaroliDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2973-277X
Cassandra K CrifasiDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6748-5389

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: There are ongoing efforts to collect larger and higher-quality amounts of occupational health and safety data to better understand and prevent injuries and fatalities among high-risk workers, such as firefighters. Digital health systems including wearable technologies, mobile apps, or internet-based data collection platforms could collect large amounts of sensitive data, but there is little evidence on worker and employer perspectives on data privacy in the fire service. Objective: Our study examined firefighters' and fire service leadership's preferences regarding occupational health and safety data privacy. Methods: We conducted interviews and focus groups with career firefighters in Maryland and Virginia; interviews with union representatives and department-level leaders in each state; and interviews with national-level fire service leaders in advocacy, government, and research organizations (March to November 2023). Interviews and focus groups were audio recorded and transcribed. We analyzed transcripts using thematic analysis. Results: The sample included 31 career firefighters, 2 union leaders, 11 national leaders, and 21 department-level leaders (65 total participants from 35 interviews and 4 focus groups). We identified 4 themes: acceptability of data access, sharing, and reporting practices; data sharing and access preferences; appropriate use of firefighter data; and the need for improved communication. Leaders described firefighters' concerns about job loss and loss of privacy. Firefighters expressed general preferences that their data be deidentified and not shared widely, and they identified mental health data as important but particularly sensitive information. Firefighters also expressed frustration about sharing data with researchers or their departments without knowing the purpose or outcomes. Both firefighters and leaders emphasized the need for enhanced communication and translation of data for firefighters. Conclusions: Fire service leaders held more concerns about the use and sharing of occupational health and safety data than firefighters, but both groups identified ways to further safeguard firefighter data and improve communication about health and safety data. Future fire service data collection should incorporate privacy protections, such as limiting the collection of identifiable information and restricting data access. Data collection should be accompanied by clear communication about the purpose of the data collection, how firefighter data will be used and accessed, and the interpretation of the results. Future digital health interventions should integrate these data privacy protections to respect firefighter preferences and contribute to acceptability and uptake.

Indexed as

ConfidentialityFirefightersLeadershipOccupational HealthPrivacySafetyAdultFemaleFocus GroupsHumansInterviews as TopicMaledata accessdata privacydata sharingfirefightermental health dataoccupational health and safety

Identifiers

PMID41925702
PMCPMC13045656

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.