Secondary research use of personal medical data: patient attitudes towards data donation

How to Elucidate Consent-Free Research Use of Medical Data: A Case for "Health Data Literacy"

Unlabelled

The extensive utilization of personal health data is one of the key success factors of modern medical research. Obtaining consent to the use of such data during clinical care, however, bears the risk of low and unequal approval rates and risk of consequent methodological problems in the scientific use of the data. In view of these shortcomings, and of the proven willingness of people to contribute to medical research by sharing personal health data, the paradigm of informed consent needs to be reconsidered. The European General Data Protection Regulation gives the European member states considerable leeway with regard to permitting the research use of health data without consent. Following this approach would however require alternative offers of information that compensate for the lack of direct communication with experts during medical care. We therefore introduce the concept of "health data literacy," defined as the capacity to find, understand, and evaluate information about the risks and benefits of the research use of personal health data and to act accordingly. Specifically, health data literacy includes basic knowledge about the goals and methods of data-rich medical research and about the possibilities and limits of data protection. Although the responsibility for developing the necessary resources lies primarily with those directly involved in data-rich medical research, improving health data literacy should ultimately be of concern to everyone interested in the success of this type of research.

Attitude towards consent-free research use of personal medical data in the general German population

Background

The design of appropriate consent procedures for the secondary use of personal health data is a key concern of current medical research. In Germany, the concept of 'data donation' has recently come into focus, defined as a legal entitlement to the research use of personal medical data without prior consent, combined with an easy-to-exercise right of the data subjects to opt-out.

Methods

Standardized online interviews of 3,013 individuals, representative of the German online population, were conducted in August 2022 to determine their attitude towards data donation for medical research.

Results

A majority of participants supported a consent-free data donation regulation, both for publicly funded (85.1%) and for private medical research (66.4%). Major predictors of a positive attitude towards data donation included (i) sufficient appreciation of the respective kind of research (i.e. public or private), (ii) a reciprocity attitude that patients who benefit from research have a duty to support research, and (iii) sufficient trust in data protection and data control.

Conclusion

People's attitude towards data donation to medical research is generally positive in Germany and depends upon factors that can be curbed by legislation and internal rules of procedure. Worthy of note, designing data donation in the form of an opt-out regulation does not necessarily mean that the paradigm of informedness has to be abandoned. Rather the process of information provision must be shifted towards the creation of basic knowledge in the general population about the risks and benefits of data-intensive medical research ('health data literacy').

Population-Based Biobanking

Population-based biobanking is an essential element of medical research that has grown substantially over the last two decades, and many countries are currently pursuing large national biobanking initiatives. The rise of individual biobanks is paralleled by various networking activities in the field at both the national and international level, such as BBMRI-ERIC in the EU. A significant contribution to population-based biobanking comes from large cohort studies and national repositories, including the United Kingdom Biobank (UKBB), the CONSTANCES project in France, the German National Cohort (NAKO), LifeLines in the Netherlands, FinnGen in Finland, and the All of Us project in the U.S. At the same time, hospital-based biobanking has also gained importance in medical research. We describe some of the scientific questions that can be addressed particularly well by the use of population-based biobanks, including the discovery and calibration of biomarkers and the identification of molecular correlates of health parameters and disease states. Despite the tremendous progress made so far, some major challenges to population-based biobanking still remain, including the need to develop strategies for the long-term sustainability of biobanks, the handling of incidental findings, and the linkage of sample-related and sample-derived data to other relevant resources.

Clearing the way for participatory data stewardship in artificial intelligence development: a mixed methods approach

Participatory data stewardship (PDS) empowers individuals to shape and govern their data via responsible collection and use. As artificial intelligence (AI) requires massive amounts of data, research must assess what factors predict consumers' willingness to provide their data to AI. This mixed-methods study applied the extended Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) with additional predictors of trust and subjective norms. Participants' data donation profile was also measured to assess the influence of individuals' social duty, understanding of the purpose and guilt. Participants (N = 322) completed an experimental survey. Individuals were willing to provide data to AI via PDS when they believed it was their social duty, understood the purpose and trusted AI. However, the TAM may not be a complete model for assessing user willingness. This study establishes that individuals value the importance of trusting and comprehending the broader societal impact of AI when providing their data to AI.Practitioner summary: To build responsible and representative AI, individuals are needed to participate in data stewardship. The factors driving willingness to participate in such methods were studied via an online survey. Trust, social duty and understanding the purpose significantly predicted willingness to provide data to AI via participatory data stewardship.

Conceptualizing fairness in the secondary use of health data for research: A scoping review

With the introduction of the European Health Data Space (EHDS), the secondary use of health data for research purposes is attracting more attention. Secondary health data processing promises to address novel research questions, inform the design of future research and improve healthcare delivery generally. To comply with the existing data protection regulations, the secondary data use must be fair, among other things. However, there is no clear understanding of what fairness means in the context of secondary use of health data for scientific research purposes. In response, we conducted a scoping review of argument-based literature to explore how fairness in the secondary use of health data has been conceptualized. A total of 35 publications were included in the final synthesis after abstract and full-text screening. Using an inductive approach and a thematic analysis, our review has revealed that balancing individual and public interests, reducing power asymmetries, setting conditions for commercial involvement, and implementing benefit sharing are essential to guarantee fair secondary use research. The findings of this review can inform current and future research practices and policy development to adequately address concerns about fairness in the secondary use of health data.

Cluster Donation: How Future Healthcare Professionals Bound Certain Types of Tissues and Biomedical Research and How It Affects Their Willingness to Donate

Although biomedical research requires cooperation with a large number of donors, its success also depends on the input of healthcare professionals who play a crucial role in promoting biomedical research and influencing an individual's decision to donate one's biospecimens that are left over after a medical procedure. This work was aimed at investigating the correlation between medical and healthcare students' willingness to donate a biospecimen, the type of tissues to be donated, and the type of biomedical research to be conducted. A population survey among medical and healthcare students enrolled at the Poznan University of Medical Sciences was conducted on their attitudes toward the donation of human biological material for research purposes. A total of 1500 students responded and completed the survey. The questionnaire used multiple-choice closed-ended questions designed to explore medical and healthcare students' preferences for sharing particular types of tissues and donating to a particular type of biomedical research. It asked three questions: 1. Which type of tissue would people be willing to donate for research purposes? 2. Which organs would they be willing to donate after death? 3. What type of research would they be willing to donate to? While future healthcare professionals' beliefs regarding certain types of tissues and research can influence their willingness to donate for research purposes, many students tend to think about the body and biomedical research in terms of clusters. Consequently, their willingness to donate certain tissues for a particular type of research can affect their decision to donate other tissues. Our data suggest that cluster thinking with regard to donation can be a predictor of people's readiness to participate in the collection and management of biospecimens.

Sustained agreement rates in the longitudinal assessment of lupus patients to a Broad Consent for personal data and specimen usage in the RHINEVIT biobank

Background

Biobanks are essential structures for scientific research. The RHINEVIT biobank is used to recruit biomaterials from rheumatology patients in outpatient care and to conduct clinical research studies (e.g., cohort studies) and basic research. RHINEVIT established Broad Consents (BC) to allow extensive and relevant usage of data and biospecimens without the need for specific project restrictions. For quality assurance, we compared the consent rate of individual items of the BC versions in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in the longitudinal study.

Methods

BCs were used for biomaterial donation. Informed consent data from RHINEVIT were analyzed. Due to the content restructuring of the BC items due to changes from the templates of the working group of the Medical Ethics Commissions in the Federal Republic of Germany and GDPR requirements, content mapping of the items was performed for the analysis.

Results

From September 2015 to March 2022, 291 SLE outpatients donated biomaterials. In 119 patients, the BC was renewed at least once in a subsequent biomaterial donation. Three biomaterial donations were obtained from 21 patients and four from six patients using the respective BC. However, one consent was later revoked. Consent to the BC topics showed consistently high rates of agreement (range 97.5%-100%), with only some patients disagreeing with individual topics. This remained stable over time (median 526 days [Q1 400, Q3 844]). None of the patients disagreed with a certain topic in two consecutive visits.

Conclusion

Modifications to the BC did not result in any relevant changes in the approval rates for SLE patients. RHINEVIT's BC is successfully used for the quality-assured handling of excellently annotated biomaterial. The long-term use of these highly valuable biospecimens for unrestricted research, also in an international context, remains assured.

Patient data for commercial companies? An ethical framework for sharing patients' data with for-profit companies for research

BACKGROUND

Research using data from medical care promises to advance medical science and improve healthcare. Academia is not the only sector that expects such research to be of great benefit. The research-based health industry is also interested in so-called 'real-world' health data to develop new drugs, medical technologies or data-based health applications. While access to medical data is handled very differently in different countries, and some empirical data suggest people are uncomfortable with the idea of companies accessing health information, this paper aims to advance the ethical debate about secondary use of medical data generated in the public healthcare sector by for-profit companies for medical research (ReuseForPro).

METHODS

We first clarify some basic concepts and our ethical-normative approach, then discuss and ethically evaluate potential claims and interests of relevant stakeholders: patients as data subjects in the public healthcare system, for-profit companies, the public, and physicians and their healthcare institutions. Finally, we address the tensions between legitimate claims of different stakeholders in order to suggest conditions that might ensure ethically sound ReuseForPro.

RESULTS

We conclude that there are good reasons to grant for-profit companies access to medical data if they meet certain conditions: among others they need to respect patients' informational rights and their actions need to be compatible with the public's interest in health benefit from ReuseForPro.

Patient Perspectives and Preferences for Consent in the Digital Health Context: State-of-the-art Literature Review

BACKGROUND

The increasing integration of digital health tools into care may result in a greater flow of personal health information (PHI) between patients and providers. Although privacy legislation governs how entities may collect, use, or share PHI, such legislation has not kept pace with digital health innovations, resulting in a lack of guidance on implementing meaningful consent. Understanding patient perspectives when implementing meaningful consent is critical to ensure that it meets their needs. Consent for research in the context of digital health is limited.

OBJECTIVE

This state-of-the-art review aimed to understand the current state of research as it relates to patient perspectives on digital health consent. Its objectives were to explore what is known about the patient perspective and experience with digital health consent and provide recommendations on designing and implementing digital health consent based on the findings.

METHODS

A structured literature search was developed and deployed in 4 electronic databases-MEDLINE, IEEE Xplore, Scopus, and Web of Science-for articles published after January 2010. The initial literature search was conducted in March 2021 and updated in March 2022. Articles were eligible for inclusion if they discussed electronic consent or consent, focused on the patient perspective or preference, and were related to digital health or digital PHI. Data were extracted using an extraction template and analyzed using qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 75 articles were included for analysis. Most studies were published within the last 5 years (58/75, 77%) and conducted in a clinical care context (33/75, 44%) and in the United States (48/75, 64%). Most studies aimed to understand participants' willingness to share PHI (25/75, 33%) and participants' perceived usability and comprehension of an electronic consent notice (25/75, 33%). More than half (40/75, 53%) of the studies did not describe the type of consent model used. The broad open consent model was the most explored (11/75, 15%). Of the 75 studies, 68 (91%) found that participants were willing to provide consent; however, their consent behaviors and preferences were context-dependent. Common patient consent requirements included clear and digestible information detailing who can access PHI, for what purpose their PHI will be used, and how privacy will be ensured.

CONCLUSIONS

There is growing interest in understanding the patient perspective on digital health consent in the context of providing clinical care. There is evidence suggesting that many patients are willing to consent for various purposes, especially when there is greater transparency on how the PHI is used and oversight mechanisms are in place. Providing this transparency is critical for fostering trust in digital health tools and the innovative uses of data to optimize health and system outcomes.

Patients and Members of the Public’s Wishes Regarding Transparency in the Context of Secondary Use of Health Data: A Scoping Review (Preprint)

BACKGROUND

Secondary use of health data has reached unequaled potential to improve health systems governance, knowledge, and clinical care. Transparency regarding this secondary use is frequently cited as necessary to address deficits in trust and conditional support and to increase patient awareness.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to review the current published literature to identify different stakeholders' perspectives and recommendations on what information patients and members of the public want to learn about the secondary use of health data for research purposes and how and in which situations.

METHODS

Using PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines, we conducted a scoping review using Medline, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and PubMed databases to locate a broad range of studies published in English or French until November 2022. We included articles reporting a stakeholder's perspective or recommendations of what information patients and members of the public want to learn about the secondary use of health data for research purposes and how or in which situations. Data were collected and analyzed with an iterative thematic approach using NVivo.

RESULTS

Overall, 178 articles were included in this scoping review. The type of information can be divided into generic and specific content. Generic content includes information on governance and regulatory frameworks, technical aspects, and scientific aims. Specific content includes updates on the use of one's data, return of results from individual tests, information on global results, information on data sharing, and how to access one's data. Recommendations on how to communicate the information focused on frequency, use of various supports, formats, and wording. Methods for communication generally favored broad approaches such as nationwide publicity campaigns, mainstream and social media for generic content, and mixed approaches for specific content including websites, patient portals, and face-to-face encounters. Content should be tailored to the individual as much as possible with regard to length, avoidance of technical terms, cultural competence, and level of detail. Finally, the review outlined 4 major situations where communication was deemed necessary: before a new use of data, when new test results became available, when global research results were released, and in the advent of a breach in confidentiality.

CONCLUSIONS

This review highlights how different types of information and approaches to communication efforts may serve as the basis for achieving greater transparency. Governing bodies could use the results: to elaborate or evaluate strategies to educate on the potential benefits; to provide some knowledge and control over data use as a form of reciprocity; and as a condition to engage citizens and build and maintain trust. Future work is needed to assess which strategies achieve the greatest outreach while striking a balance between meeting information needs and use of resources.