Researchers’ perceptions of the trustworthiness, for reuse purposes, of government health data in Victoria, Australia: Implications for policy and practice

Author:

Riley Merilyn1ORCID,Kilkenny Monique F23ORCID,Robinson Kerin1ORCID,Leggat Sandra G14ORCID

Affiliation:

1. La Trobe University, Australia

2. Monash University, Australia

3. University of Melbourne, Australia

4. James Cook University, Australia

Abstract

In 2022 the Australian Data Availability and Transparency Act (DATA) commenced, enabling accredited “data users” to access data from “accredited data service providers.” However, the DATA Scheme lacks guidance on “trustworthiness” of the data to be utilised for reuse purposes. Objectives: To determine: (i) Do researchers using government health datasets trust the data? (ii) What factors influence their perceptions of data trustworthiness? and (iii) What are the implications for government and data custodians? Method: Authors of published studies (2008–2020) that utilised Victorian government health datasets were surveyed via a case study approach. Twenty-eight trust constructs (identified via literature review) were grouped into data factors, management properties and provider factors. Results: Fifty experienced health researchers responded. Most (88%) believed that Victorian government health data were trustworthy. When grouped, data factors and management properties were more important than data provider factors in building trust. The most important individual trust constructs were: “compliant with ethical regulation” (100%) and “monitoring privacy and confidentiality” (98%). Constructs of least importance were knowledge of “participant consent” (56%) and “major focus of the data provider was research” (50%). Conclusion: Overall, the researchers trusted government health data, but data factors and data management properties were more important than data provider factors in building trust. Implications: Government should ensure the DATA Scheme incorporates mechanisms to validate those data utilised by accredited data users and data providers have sufficient quality (intrinsic and extrinsic) to meet the requirements of “trustworthiness,” and that evidentiary documentation is provided to support these “accredited data.”

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Reference61 articles.

1. Elements of Trust in Digital Health Systems: Scoping Review

2. A systematic review of knowledge management and knowledge sharing: Trends, issues, and challenges

3. Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) (May 2009) ABS data quality framework. Available at: https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/1520.0 (accessed 30 September 2023).

4. Australian Government (n.d.) Publishing data: Recommended data formats. Available at: https://toolkit.data.gov.au/publishing-data/recommended-data-formats.html (accessed 28 January 2024).

5. Australian Government Department of Finance (2022) Public data policy initiatives. Available at: https://www.finance.gov.au/government/public-data/public-data-policy-initiatives (accessed 26 June 2023).

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