Article Text
Abstract
Introduction Understanding the views of the public is essential if generally acceptable policies are to be devised that balance research access to general practice patient records with protection of patients' privacy. However, few large studies have been conducted about public attitudes to research access to personal health information.
Methods A mixed methods study was performed. Informed by focus groups and literature review, a questionnaire was designed which assessed attitudes to research access to personal health information and factors that influence these. A postal survey was conducted of an electoral roll-based sample of the adult population of Ireland.
Results Completed questionnaires were returned by 1575 (40.6%). Among the respondents, 67.5% were unwilling to allow GPs to decide when researchers could access identifiable personal health information. However, 89.5% said they would agree to ongoing consent arrangements, allowing the sharing by GPs of anonymous personal health information with researchers without the need for consent on a study-by-study basis. Increasing age (by each 10-year increment), being retired and primary level education only were significantly associated with an increased likelihood of agreeing that any personal health information could be shared on an ongoing basis: OR 1.39 (95% CI 1.18 to 1.63), 2.00 (95% CI 1.22 to 3.29) and 3.91 (95% CI 1.95 to 7.85), respectively.
Conclusions Although survey data can be prone to response biases, this study suggests that prior consent agreements allowing the supply by GPs of anonymous personal health information to researchers may be widely supported, and that populations willing to opt in to such arrangements may be sufficiently representative to facilitate valid and robust consent-dependent observational research.
- Scientific research
- informed consent
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Funding The study was funded by the Health Research Board of Ireland (Project Grant RP/2006/42).
Competing interests None.
Ethics approval This study was conducted with the approval of the research ethics committee of the Irish College of General Practitioners.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Request Permissions
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Copyright information:
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Selection bias resulting from the requirement for prior consent in observational research: a community cohort of people with ischaemic heart disease
- Differences in demographics and outcomes based on method of consent for a randomised controlled trial on heat loss prevention in the delivery room
- Bias from requiring explicit consent from all participants in observational research: prospective, population based study
- Do patients with angina alone have a more benign prognosis than patients with a history of acute myocardial infarction, revascularisation or both? Findings from a community cohort study
- Biomedical conflicts of interest: a defence of the sequestration thesis — learning from the cases of Nancy Olivieri and David Healy
- Fifteen - minute consultation: an evidence - based approach to research without prior consent (deferred consent) in neonatal and paediatric critical care trials
- Consent and the ethical duty to participate in health data research
- Developing a new model for patient recruitment in mental health services: a cohort study using Electronic Health Records
- Confidentiality of personal health information used for research
- Public interest in health data research: laying out the conceptual groundwork