Parent perspectives on consent for the linkage of data to evaluate vaccine safety: a randomised trial of opt-in and opt-out consent

Sharing Government Health Data With the Private Sector: Community Attitudes Survey

Background

The use of government health data for secondary purposes, such as monitoring the quality of hospital services, researching the health needs of populations, and testing how well new treatments work, is increasing. This increase in the secondary uses of health data has led to increased interest in what the public thinks about data sharing, in particular, the possibilities of sharing with the private sector for research and development. Although international evidence demonstrates broad public support for the secondary use of health data, this support does not extend to sharing health data with the private sector. If governments intend to share health data with the private sector, knowing what the public thinks will be important. This paper reports a national survey to explore public attitudes in Australia toward sharing health data with private companies for research on and development of therapeutic drugs and medical devices.

Objective

This study aims to explore public attitudes in Australia toward sharing government health data with the private sector.

Methods

A web-based survey tool was developed to assess attitudes about sharing government health data with the private sector. A market research company was employed to administer the web-based survey in June 2019.

Results

The survey was completed by 2537 individuals residing in Australia. Between 51.8% and 57.98% of all participants were willing to share their data, with slightly fewer in favor of sharing to improve health services (51.99%) and a slightly higher proportion in favor of sharing for research and development (57.98%). There was a preference for opt-in consent (53.44%) and broad support for placing conditions on sharing health information with private companies (62% to 91.99%). Wide variability was also observed in participants’ views about the extent to which the private sector could be trusted and how well they would behave if entrusted with people’s health information. In their qualitative responses, the participants noted concerns about private sector corporate interests, corruption, and profit making and expressed doubt about the Australian government’s capacity to manage data sharing safely. The percentages presented are adjusted against the Australian population.

Conclusions

This nationally representative survey provides preliminary evidence that Australians are uncertain about sharing their health data with the private sector. Although just over half of all the respondents supported sharing health data with the private sector, there was also strong support for strict conditions on sharing data and for opt-in consent and significant concerns about how well the private sector would manage government health data. Addressing public concern about sharing government health data with the private sector will require more and better engagement to build community understanding about how agencies can collect, share, protect, and use their personal data.

Incorporating parent, former patient and clinician perspectives in the design of a national UK double-cluster, randomised controlled trial addressing uncertainties in preterm nutrition

Background

Comparative effectiveness randomised controlled trials are powerful tools to resolve uncertainties in existing treatments and care processes. We sought parent and patient perspectives on the design of a planned national, double-cluster randomised controlled trial (COLLABORATE) to resolve two longstanding uncertainties in preterm nutrition.

Methods

We used qualitative focus groups and interviews with parents, former patients and clinicians. We followed the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research checklist and conducted framework analysis, a specific methodology within thematic analysis.

Results

We identified support for the trial's methodology and vision, and elicited themes illustrating parents' emotional needs in relation to clinical research. These were: relieving the pressure on mothers to breastfeed; opt-out consent as reducing parent stress; the desire for research to be a partnership between clinicians, parents and researchers; the value of presenting trial information in a collaborative tone; and in a format that allows assimilation by parents at their own pace. We identified anxiety and cognitive dissonance among some clinicians in which they recognised the uncertainties that justify the trial but felt unable to participate because of their strongly held views.

Conclusions

The early involvement of parents and former patients identified the centrality of parents' emotional needs in the design of comparative effectiveness research. These insights have been incorporated into trial enrolment processes and information provided to participants. Specific outputs were a two-sided leaflet providing very brief as well as more detailed information, and use of language that parents perceive as inclusive and participatory. Further work is warranted to support clinicians to address personal biases that inhibit trial participation.

Consumer acceptability and validity of m-Health for the detection of adverse events following immunization - The Stimulated Telephone Assisted Rapid Safety Surveillance (STARSS) randomised control trial

INTRODUCTION

Monitoring for adverse events following immunisation (AEFI) is critical for vaccine pharmacovigilance. Given the global and expanding availability of mobile phones their utility for consumer-based vaccine safety surveillance is of interest but little is known about consumer acceptability. This study nested within the Stimulated Telephone Assisted Rapid Safety Surveillance (STARSS) randomised control trial sought to evaluate the acceptability of SMS for AEFI surveillance.

METHODS

The primary STARSS study was a multi-centre RCT evaluating the efficacy of repeated SMS prompts for AEFI surveillance with participants being adult vaccinees or parents of children receiving any vaccine. This nested study enrolled primary RCT participants who completed a detailed computer assisted telephone interview to determine their attitudes towards SMS-based surveillance and ascertain their knowledge and attitudes toward vaccine safety, efficacy, data privacy and use of electronic health records. Attitudes to surveillance and related behaviour were used as measures of acceptability.

RESULTS

20% (1200/6555) of the participants were enrolled and 1139 completed the full-length questionnaire. 96% indicated that SMS-based surveillance after immunisation to check the safety of the vaccine "should be done" but 62% of all respondents said it should be done but consent should be sought first. Neither vaccine safety attitudes nor attitudes toward privacy were associated with opposition to SMS-based surveillance. In terms of SMS related behaviour demographic rather than attitudinal factors were associated with non-compliance.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the attitude towards SMS-based surveillance was very favourable. Experiencing the SMS surveillance has the effect of reducing opposition to an SMS surveillance system, and at the same time increasing the likelihood of a preference for prior consent. Detection of a vaccine safety signal could be impeded in particular demographic groups who are non-compliant and we should undertake further research to understand why these groups are non-compliant and how this can be improved.

Opt-out Consent in Children's Emergency Medicine Research

There is global acceptance that individuals should be allowed to decide whether or not to take part in research studies, and to do so after being informed about the nature of the research and the risk that might attach to participation. The process of providing detailed information before seeking consent (formalized by signatures) in advance of undertaking research procedures may not be possible in some circumstances, and sometimes an amended approach may be adopted. The use of opt-out consent has been recognized as a valid and ethical means of recruiting participants to studies particularly with large samples and where the risk to participants is small. However, it is sometimes misunderstood and can be a problematic factor in being accepted by research ethics committees and governing authorities. This may be due partly to differing expectations of the amount of information and support offered, together with the nature of the process that is adopted to ensure that a decision has been made rather than consent simply being assumed. In accordance with ongoing discussions with young people, and following consultation with parents, an opt-out consent strategy including varied means of providing information was employed in a large study of 44,501 cases of children attending emergency or urgent care departments. The study was conducted over more than 12 months in dissimilar emergency departments and an urgent care unit, and was designed to support better decision-making in pediatric emergency departments about whether children need to be admitted to hospital or can be discharged home safely. Robust analysis of the factors that exerted the greatest impact on predicting the need to admit or the safety of discharging children led to a revised version of an existing tool. In this article, we review approaches to consent in research, the nature and impact of opt-out consent, the factors that made this an effective strategy for this study, but also more recent concerns which may make opt-out consent no longer acceptable.

Pro-Con Perspectives on Ethics in Surgical Research: Update from the 39th Annual Surgical Infection Society Meeting

Background: Surgical research is potentially invasive, high-risk, and costly. Research that advances medical dogma must justify both its ends and its means. Although ethical questions do not always have simple answers, it is critically important for the clinician, researcher, and patient to approach these dilemmas and surgical research in a thoughtful, conscientious manner. Methods: We present four ethical issues in surgical research and discuss the opposing viewpoints. These topics were presented and discussed at the 39th Annual Meeting of the Surgical Infection Society as pro-con debates. The presenters of each opinion developed a succinct summary of their respective reviews for this publication. Results: The key subjects for these pro-con debates were: (1) Should patients be enrolled for time-sensitive surgical infection research using an opt-out or an opt-in strategy? (2) Should patients who are being enrolled in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing surgery with a non-operative intervention pay the costs of their treatment arm? (3) Should the scientific community embrace open access journals as the future of scientific publishing? (4) Should the majority of funding go to clinical or basic science research? Important points were illustrated in each of the pro-con presentations and illustrated the difficulties that are facing the performance and payment of infection research in the future. Conclusions: Surgical research is ethically complex, with conflicting demands between individual patients, society, and healthcare economics. At present, there are no clear answers to these and the many other ethical issues facing research in the future. Answers will only come from continued robust dialogue among all stakeholders in surgical research.

Five models for child and adolescent data linkage in the UK: a review of existing and proposed methods

Over the last decade dramatic advances have been made in both the technology and data available to better understand the multifactorial influences on child and adolescent health and development. This paper seeks to clarify methods that can be used to link information from health, education, social care and research datasets. Linking these different types of data can facilitate epidemiological research that investigates mental health from the population to the patient; enabling advanced analytics to better identify, conceptualise and address child and adolescent needs. The majority of adolescent mental health research is not able to maximise the full potential of data linkage, primarily due to four key challenges: confidentiality, sampling, matching and scalability. By presenting five existing and proposed models for linking adolescent data in relation to these challenges, this paper aims to facilitate the clinical benefits that will be derived from effective integration of available data in understanding, preventing and treating mental disorders.

Research ethics committee decision-making in relation to an efficient neonatal trial

OBJECTIVE

Randomised controlled trials, a gold-standard approach to reduce uncertainties in clinical practice, are growing in cost and are often slow to recruit. We determined whether methodological approaches to facilitate large, efficient clinical trials were acceptable to UK research ethics committees (RECs).

DESIGN

We developed a protocol in collaboration with parents, for a comparative-effectiveness, randomised controlled trial comparing two widely used blood transfusion practices in preterm infants. We incorporated four approaches to improve recruitment and efficiency: (i) point-of-care design using electronic patient records for patient identification, randomisation and data acquisition, (ii) short two-page information sheet; (iii) explicit mention of possible inclusion benefit; (iv) opt-out consent with enrolment as the default. With the support of the UK Health Research Authority, we submitted an identical protocol to 12 UK REC.

SETTING

RECs in the UK.

MAIN OUTCOME

Number of REC granting favourable opinions.

RESULTS

The use of electronic patient records was acceptable to all RECs; one REC raised concerns about the short parent information sheet, 10 about inclusion benefit and 9 about opt-out consent. Following responses to queries, nine RECs granted a favourable final opinion and three rejected the application because they considered the opt-out consent process invalid.

CONCLUSIONS

A majority of RECs in this study consider the use of electronic patient record data, short information sheets, opt-out consent and mention of possible inclusion benefit to be acceptable in neonatal comparative-effectiveness research. We identified a need for guidance for RECs in relation to opt-out consent processes. These methods provide opportunity to facilitate large randomised controlled trials.

A population-based approach for implementing change from opt-out to opt-in research permissions

Due to recently proposed changes in the Common Rule regarding the collection of research preferences, there is an increased need for efficient methods to document opt-in research preferences at a population level. Previously, our institution developed an opt-out paper-based workflow that could not be utilized for research in a scalable fashion. This project was designed to demonstrate the feasibility of implementing an electronic health record (EHR)-based active opt-in research preferences program. The first phase of implementation required creating and disseminating a patient questionnaire through the EHR portal to populate discreet fields within the EHR indicating patients' preferences for future research study contact (contact) and their willingness to allow anonymised use of excess tissue and fluid specimens (biobank). In the second phase, the questionnaire was presented within a clinic nurse intake workflow in an obstetrical clinic. These permissions were tabulated in registries for use by investigators for feasibility studies and recruitment. The registry was also used for research patient contact management using a new EHR encounter type to differentiate research from clinical encounters. The research permissions questionnaire was sent to 59,670 patients via the EHR portal. Within four months, 21,814 responses (75% willing to participate in biobanking, and 72% willing to be contacted for future research) were received. Each response was recorded within a patient portal encounter to enable longitudinal analysis of responses. We obtained a significantly lower positive response from the 264 females who completed the questionnaire in the obstetrical clinic (55% volunteers for biobank and 52% for contact). We demonstrate that it is possible to establish a research permissions registry using the EHR portal and clinic-based workflows. This patient-centric, population-based, opt-in approach documents preferences in the EHR, allowing linkage of these preferences to health record information.

Data Safe Havens and Trust: Toward a Common Understanding of Trusted Research Platforms for Governing Secure and Ethical Health Research

In parallel with the advances in big data-driven clinical research, the data safe haven concept has evolved over the last decade. It has led to the development of a framework to support the secure handling of health care information used for clinical research that balances compliance with legal and regulatory controls and ethical requirements while engaging with the public as a partner in its governance. We describe the evolution of 4 separately developed clinical research platforms into services throughout the United Kingdom-wide Farr Institute and their common deployment features in practice. The Farr Institute is a case study from which we propose a common definition of data safe havens as trusted platforms for clinical academic research. We use this common definition to discuss the challenges and dilemmas faced by the clinical academic research community, to help promote a consistent understanding of them and how they might best be handled in practice. We conclude by questioning whether the common definition represents a safe and trustworthy model for conducting clinical research that can stand the test of time and ongoing technical advances while paying heed to evolving public and professional concerns.

The acceptability of conducting data linkage research without obtaining consent: lay people's views and justifications

Background

A key ethical issue arising in data linkage research relates to consent requirements. Patients’ consent preferences in the context of health research have been explored but their consent preferences regarding data linkage specifically have been under-explored. In addition, the views on data linkage are often those of patient groups. As a result, little is known about lay people’s views and their preferences about consent requirements in the context of data linkage. This study explores lay people’s views and justifications regarding the acceptability of conducting data linkage research without obtaining consent.

Methods

A qualitative study explored lay people’s views regarding consent requirements in data linkage via four hypothetical data linkage scenarios of increasing complexity. Prior to considering the scenarios, participants were provided with information regarding best practice data linkage processes via discussion and a diagrammatic representation of the process.

Results

Lay people were able to understand the intricate processes involved in data linkage and the key protections afforded within a short amount of time. They were supportive of data linkage research and, on the whole, believed it should be conducted without consent provided a data linkage organization de-identifies the data used so that researchers do not handle identifiable data. Many thought that de-identified data holds a different status to identifiable data and should be used without specific consent in research that aims to benefit society. In weighing up conflicting values and interests, participants shifted consent preferences before arriving at their final consent preference for each scenario and provided justifications for their choices. They considered the protection of people’s information, societal benefits, and the nature and constraints of research and recognized that these need to be balanced.

Conclusions

With some exposure to the features of data linkage, lay people have the capacity to understand the processes sufficiently in order to consider ethical issues associated with consent preferences. Shifts in views reveal the complexity of such decisions. While privacy protection remained an important consideration for most participants, adequate protection measures adopted in best practice data linkage were viewed by most as protection enough for data linkage to proceed without specific individual consent.

The importance of purpose: moving beyond consent in the societal use of personal health information

BACKGROUND

Adoption of electronic health record systems has increased the availability of patient-level electronic health information.

OBJECTIVE

To examine public support for secondary uses of electronic health information under different consent arrangements.

DESIGN

National experimental survey to examine perceptions of uses of electronic health information according to patient consent (obtained vs. not obtained), use (research vs. marketing), and framing of the findings (abstract description without results vs. specific results).

SETTING

Nationally representative survey.

PARTICIPANTS

3064 African American, Hispanic, and non-Hispanic white persons (response rate, 65%).

MEASUREMENTS

Appropriateness of health information use described in vignettes on a scale of 1 (not at all appropriate) to 10 (very appropriate).

RESULTS

Mean ratings ranged from a low of 3.81 for a marketing use when consent was not obtained and specific results were presented to a high of 7.06 for a research use when consent was obtained and specific results were presented. Participants rated scenarios in which consent was obtained as more appropriate than when consent was not obtained (difference, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.69 to 1.34]; P<0.001). Participants rated scenarios in which the use was marketing as less appropriate than when the use was research (difference, -2.03 [CI, -2.27 to -1.78]; P<0.001). Unconsented research uses were rated as more appropriate than consented marketing uses (5.65 vs. 4.52; difference, 1.13 [CI, 0.87 to 1.39]).

LIMITATIONS

Participants rated hypothetical scenarios. Results could be vulnerable to nonresponse bias despite the high response rate.

CONCLUSION

Although approaches to health information sharing emphasize consent, public opinion also emphasizes purpose, which suggests a need to focus more attention on the social value of information use.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Human Genome Research Institute.