ArticleBMC public health2026
Operationalizing transparency regarding the use of health data for research: a cross-sectional survey of citizens' perspectives.
Article in BMC public health, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSecondary use of health data can accelerate discovery and enable personalized care, yet social acceptability relies on autonomy, transparency, and trust, especially in the context of security breaches and concerns about misuse. In Quebec, as in many Western settings, there is no formal mechanism to inform individuals about such use, underscoring the need for practical solutions. This quantitative cross-sectional study assessed whether transparency mechanisms increase trust in the use of health data for research; examined their perceived priority and acceptability; and explored effects across population subgroups.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional telephone survey among 366 adults in Quebec (Canada) selected via stratified random sampling. The sample included a random selection of adult household members based on age. Descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and exploratory multivariate logistic regressions were performed.
resultsMore than half of respondents were unaware that their health data may be used for research. Trust was higher for public-sector than private-sector researchers. Overall, 76% indicated that access to information would increase their trust, particularly younger adults (OR = 1.98, 95% CI: 1.10-3.57). Over 90% judged implementing transparency mechanisms within five years as important, with stronger support among those aware of current data use (OR = 4.63, 95% CI: 1.33-16.20). A secure website was considered acceptable by 75% of respondents as a transparency mechanism. Individuals with high trust in public-sector researchers (OR: 2.06, 95% CI: 1.08-3.94) and younger adults (OR: 2.05, 95% CI: 1.13-3.71) were more likely to consider it important. Exploratory analyses suggested that awareness of current data use for research and pre-existing trust predict increased trust in researchers from various public and private organizations if a secure website is implemented.
conclusionProviding information through a transparency mechanism, particularly via a secure website, appears acceptable, valued, and potentially effective for increasing trust in the use of health data for research. Our findings support the feasibility of a web-based transparency portal and suggest tailoring communication to demographic, trust and awareness profiles.
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.