Health information privacy and e-healthcare

International Journal of Healthcare Technology and Management

Volumn 4, Issue 1-2, 2002, Pages 41-52

  Kelly, Eileen P ^a   Unsal, Fahri ^a  

^a ITHACA COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

electronic commerce; ethics; Healthcare; privacy; technology

Indexed keywords

EID: 19044396918     PISSN: 13682156     EISSN: 17415144     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1504/ijhtm.2002.001128     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Nagourney, E. (2000) ‘If a site is all about your health, who else might be peeking?’, New York Times, 25 October, H.16+, http://proquest.umi.com.
2. Harris, R. (1997) ‘The need to know versus the right to know: privacy of patient medical data in an information based society’, Suffolk University Law Review, Vol. 30, Winter, p.1183.
3. Hopper, I. (2000) ‘Agencies track online visitors despite rules’, The Washington Post, 22 October, A13+ (http://proquest.umi.com/).
4. 2000) ‘Online pharmacies: industry growing, safety still concern’, American Health Line, 25 October, http://web.lexis-nexis.com.
5. Jennings, C. and Fena, L. (2000) The Hundredth Window: Protecting Your Privacy and Security in the Age of the Internet, The Free Press, New York, p.69.
6. Schwartz, P. (1995) ‘The protection of privacy in healthcare reform’, Vanderbilt Law Review, Vol. 48, March, pp.295–347.
7. Goldman, J. and Hudson, Z. (2000) ‘Virtually exposed: privacy and e-health’, Health Affairs, December, Vol. 19, No. 6, pp.140–145, http://ehealth.chcf.org.
8. California Healthcare Foundation. Ethics Survey of Consumer Attitudes About Health Websites, pp.1–15, http://ehealth.chcf.org.
9. MedicAlert (2000) Gallup Survey Finds Most American Shun Using Internet for Personal Health Information. 13 November, http://www.medicalert.org.
10. Citizens’ Council on Healthcare (1999) Two New Rules Erode Privacy of Medical Records for All Home Health Patients Regardless of Insurance Coverage, January 25, http://www.cchc-mn.org/OASISrn.html.
11. Minnesota Department of Health (1999) ‘Outcome and Assessment Information Set (OASIS) update’, Information Bulletin 99–9 MHC-7, May, http://www.health.state.mn.us.
12. Mowery, G. (1998) ‘A patient’s right of privacy in computerized pharmacy records’, University of Cincinnati Law Review, Vol. 66, Winter, pp.697–746.
13. Rosen, J. (2000) ‘Opportunity knocks at provider’s door’, Health Management Technology, September, Vol. 21, No. 9, pp.24–25, (http://proquest.umi.com/).
14. Fisher, S. (2000) ‘Online healthcare contends with fraud’, InfoWorld, 3 July, Vol. 22, No. 27, pp.33–36, (http://proquest.umi.com/).
15. Olmstead v. United States, 277 US 438 (1928).
16. Griswald v. Connecticut, (1967), 381 US 479.
17. Roe v. Wade, 410 US 113, 219 (1973).
18. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 US 833, 900 (1992).
19. Gostin, L. (1995) ‘Health information privacy’, Cornell Law Review, Vol. 80, March, pp.451–528.
20. Department of Health and Human Services (1999) Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information, November 3, http://erm.aspe.hhs.gov.
21. 2000) ‘HHS announces electronic standards to simplify healthcare transactions’, HHS News, 11 August, http://www.hhs.gov
22. Young, C. (1998) ‘Telemedicine: patient privacy rights of electronic medical records’, UMKC Law Review, Vol. 66, Summer, pp.921–937.
23. Stepanek, M. (2000) ‘Surf at your own risk’, Business Week, 30 October, p.143.
24. Etzioni, A. (1999) The Limits of Privacy, Vol. 2, Basic Books, New York
25. National Research Council (1997) ‘For the record: protecting electronic health information’, http://stills.nap.edu.
26. Landro, L. (2000) ‘How technology has changed the way we deal with our doctors’, Wall Street Journal, 13 November, R23.