Perspectives on illness-related stigma and electronically sharing psychiatric health information by people with multiple sclerosis

Health data sharing attitudes towards primary and secondary use of data: a systematic review

Background

To receive the best care, people share their health data (HD) with their health practitioners (known as sharing HD for primary purposes). However, during the past two decades, sharing for other (i.e., secondary) purposes has become of great importance in numerous fields, including public health, personalized medicine, research, and development. We aimed to conduct the first comprehensive overview of all studies that investigated people's HD sharing attitudes-along with associated barriers/motivators and significant influencing factors-for all data types and across both primary and secondary uses.

Methods

We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, EMBASE, and CINAHL for relevant studies published in English between database inception and February 28, 2023, using a predefined set of keywords. Studies were included, regardless of their design, if they reported outcomes related to attitudes towards sharing HD. We extracted key data from the included studies, including the type of HD involved and findings related to: HD sharing attitudes (either in general or depending on type of data/user); barriers/motivators/benefits/concerns of the study participants; and sociodemographic and other variables that could impact HD sharing behaviour. The qualitative synthesis was conducted by dividing the studies according to the data type (resulting in five subgroups) as well as the purpose the data sharing was focused on (primary, secondary or both). The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of non-randomised studies. This work was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42023413822.

Findings

Of 2109 studies identified through our search, 116 were included in the qualitative synthesis, yielding a total of 228,501 participants and various types of HD represented: person-generated HD (n = 17 studies and 10,771 participants), personal HD in general (n = 69 studies and 117,054 participants), Biobank data (n = 7 studies and 27,073 participants), genomic data (n = 13 studies and 54,716 participants), and miscellaneous data (n = 10 studies and 18,887 participants). The majority of studies had a moderate level of quality (83 [71.6%] of 116 studies), but varying levels of quality were observed across the included studies. Overall, studies suggest that sharing intentions for primary purposes were observed to be high regardless of data type, and it was higher than sharing intentions for secondary purposes. Sharing for secondary purposes yielded variable findings, where both the highest and the lowest intention rates were observed in the case of studies that explored sharing biobank data (98% and 10%, respectively). Several influencing factors on sharing intentions were identified, such as the type of data recipient, data, consent. Further, concerns related to data sharing that were found to be mutual for all data types included privacy, security, and data access/control, while the perceived benefits included those related to improvements in healthcare. Findings regarding attitudes towards sharing varied significantly across sociodemographic factors and depended on data type and type of use. In most cases, these findings were derived from single studies and therefore warrant confirmations from additional studies.

Interpretation

Sharing health data is a complex issue that is influenced by various factors (the type of health data, the intended use, the data recipient, among others) and these insights could be used to overcome barriers, address people's concerns, and focus on spreading awareness about the data sharing process and benefits.

Funding

None.

A Closed-Loop Digital Health Tool to Improve Depression Care in Multiple Sclerosis: Iterative Design and Cross-Sectional Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial and its Impact on Depression Care

BACKGROUND

People living with multiple sclerosis (MS) face a higher likelihood of being diagnosed with a depressive disorder than the general population. Although many low-cost screening tools and evidence-based interventions exist, depression in people living with MS is underreported, underascertained by clinicians, and undertreated.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to design a closed-loop tool to improve depression care for these patients. It would support regular depression screening, tie into the point of care, and support shared decision-making and comprehensive follow-up. After an initial development phase, this study involved a proof-of-concept pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) validation phase and a detailed human-centered design (HCD) phase.

METHODS

During the initial development phase, the technological infrastructure of a clinician-facing point-of-care clinical dashboard for MS management (BRIDGE) was leveraged to incorporate features that would support depression screening and comprehensive care (Care Technology to Ascertain, Treat, and Engage the Community to Heal Depression in people living with MS [MS CATCH]). This linked a patient survey, in-basket messages, and a clinician dashboard. During the pilot RCT phase, a convenience sample of 50 adults with MS was recruited from a single MS center with 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire scores of 5-19 (mild to moderately severe depression). During the routine MS visit, their clinicians were either asked or not to use MS CATCH to review their scores and care outcomes were collected. During the HCD phase, the MS CATCH components were iteratively modified based on feedback from stakeholders: people living with MS, MS clinicians, and interprofessional experts.

RESULTS

MS CATCH links 3 features designed to support mood reporting and ascertainment, comprehensive evidence-based management, and clinician and patient self-management behaviors likely to lead to sustained depression relief. In the pilot RCT (n=50 visits), visits in which the clinician was randomized to use MS CATCH had more notes documenting a discussion of depressive symptoms than those in which MS CATCH was not used (75% vs 34.6%; χ21=8.2; P=.004). During the HCD phase, 45 people living with MS, clinicians, and other experts participated in the design and refinement. The final testing round included 20 people living with MS and 10 clinicians including 5 not affiliated with our health system. Most scoring targets for likeability and usability, including perceived ease of use and perceived effectiveness, were met. Net Promoter Scale was 50 for patients and 40 for clinicians.

CONCLUSIONS

Created with extensive stakeholder feedback, MS CATCH is a closed-loop system aimed to increase communication about depression between people living with MS and their clinicians, and ultimately improve depression care. The pilot findings showed evidence of enhanced communication. Stakeholders also advised on trial design features of a full year long Department of Defense-funded feasibility and efficacy trial, which is now underway.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05865405; http://tinyurl.com/4zkvru9x.

Validity and reliability of the Persian version of Recce stigma scale in people with multiple sclerosis and its impact on quality of life

BACKGROUND

There is often a fear of social stigma experienced by people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS), which negatively impacts the quality of their lives (QoL). Currently, no Persian-validated questionnaire is available to assess this issue in pwMS. This study aimed to assess the validaty and reliability of the Persian version of Reece Stigma Scale Multiple Sclerosis (RSS-MS) questionnaire for pwMS.

METHOD

This cross-sectional was conducted between January and February 2023 in Isfahan, Iran. The demographic and clinical information and the RSS-MS and Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale-29 (MSIS-29) questionnaires were recorded from pwMS. The content validity index (CVI) and content validity ratio (CVR) have been used to evaluate validity. To identify the factors supporting the MS-related stigma, an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted.

RESULTS

The present study recruited 194 pwMS. Based on factor analysis, only two factors had eigenvalues ≥ 1.0 and exhibited high internal consistency. The Cronbach's α coefficient for internal consistency of the RSS-MS scale was 0.822. More evidence for the construct validity suggested that having higher levels of stigma is significantly correlated with psychological (r = 0.468, p-value < 0.001) and physical dimensions (r = 0.585, p-value < 0.001) of MSIS-29. Expanded Disability Status Scale, disease duration, and treatment duration did not show a significant correlation with stigma (p-value > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

This study indicated that the modified version of the RSS-MS scale in the Persian language showed acceptable validity and reliability for evaluating the stigma among Persian pwMS. Furthermore, this study emphasizes the cruciality of monitoring and addressing stigma among pwMS, as it can potentially enhance medical, psychological, physical, and QoL outcomes.

Measuring the willingness to share personal health information: a systematic review

Background

In the age of digitalization and big data, personal health information is a key resource for health care and clinical research. This study aimed to analyze the determinants and describe the measurement of the willingness to disclose personal health information.

Methods

The study conducted a systematic review of articles assessing willingness to share personal health information as a primary or secondary outcome. The review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis protocol. English and Italian peer-reviewed research articles were included with no restrictions for publication years. Findings were narratively synthesized.

Results

The search strategy found 1,087 papers, 89 of which passed the screening for title and abstract and the full-text assessment.

Conclusion

No validated measurement tool has been developed for willingness to share personal health information. The reviewed papers measured it through surveys, interviews, and questionnaires, which were mutually incomparable. The secondary use of data was the most important determinant of willingness to share, whereas clinical and socioeconomic variables had a slight effect. The main concern discouraging data sharing was privacy, although good data anonymization and the high perceived benefits of sharing may overcome this issue.