Ethical practice in sharing and mining medical data

Author:

Watson Kevin,Payne Dinah M.

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to review current practice in sharing and mining medical data revealing benefits, costs and ethical issues. Based on stakeholder perspectives and values, the authors create an ethical code to regulate the sharing and mining of medical information. Design/methodology/approach The framework is based on a review of academic, practitioner and legal research. Findings Owing to the inability of current safeguards to protect consumers from risks related to the disclosure of medical information, the authors develop a framework for ethical sharing and mining of medical data, security, transparency, respect, accountability, community and quality (STRACQ), which espouses security, transparency, respect, accountability, community and quality as the basic tenets of ethical data sharing and mining practice. Research limitations/implications The STRACQ framework is an original, previously unpublished contribution that will require modification over time based on discussion and debate within and among the academy, medical community and public policymakers. Social implications The framework for sharing borrows from the Fair Credit Reporting Act, allowing the collection and dissemination of identified medical data but placing strict limitations on use. Following this framework, benefits of shared and mined medical data are freely available with appropriate safeguards for consumer privacy. Originality/value Mandates for adoption of electronic health-care records require an understanding of medical data mining. This paper presents a review of data mining techniques and reasons for engaging in the practice of identifying benefits, costs and ethical issues. The authors create an original framework, STRACQ, for ethical sharing and mining of medical information, allowing knowledge exploration while protecting consumer privacy.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Computer Networks and Communications,Sociology and Political Science,Philosophy,Communication

Reference77 articles.

1. Machine learning and health care disparities in dermatology;JAMA Dermatology,2018

2. American Medical Association (2000), “The domain of health care information privacy”, www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/physician-resources/medical-ethics/the-ethical-force-program/privacy-confidentiality/consensus-report.page? (accessed 28 October 2013).

3. American Medical Association (2019), “REPORT 32 OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES (A-19) Impact of High Capital Costs of Hospital EHRs on the Medical Staff”, available at: www.ama-assn.org/system/files/2019-04/a19-bot32.pdf (accessed 20 January 2020).

4. Calculating consequences: the utilitarian approach to ethics;Issues in Ethics,1989

5. Adoption of electronic health records in the presence of privacy concerns: the elaboration likelihood model and individual persuasion;MIS Quarterly,2009

Cited by 4 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3