Confidentiality preserving audits of electronic medical record access

Studies in Health Technology and Informatics

Volumn 129, Issue , 2007, Pages 320-324

  Malin, Bradley ^a   Airoldi, Edoardo ^b  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b Princeton University   (United States)

Author keywords

computer security; confidentiality; electronic medical records systems; medical record linkage; privacy

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER PRIVACY; DATA PRIVACY; HEALTH CARE; INFORMATION SYSTEMS; INFORMATION USE; MEDICAL COMPUTING; SECURITY OF DATA; TELEMEDICINE;

CONFIDENTIALITY; ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORD; HEALTH INFORMATION SYSTEMS; HEALTHCARE ENVIRONMENTS; HEALTHCARE ORGANIZATIONS; MEDICAL RECORD; PRIVACY PRESERVING; SENSITIVE INFORMATIONS;

ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT EXCHANGE;

EID: 78649818394     PISSN: 09269630     EISSN: 18798365     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (19)

1. National Research Council. For the record: protecting electronic health information. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. 1997.
2. Safran C, Rind D, Citroen M, Bakker AR, Slack WV, and Bleich HL. Protection of confidentiality in the computerbased patient record. MD Computing 1995: 12: 187-192.
3. U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Civil Rights. Standards for protection of electronic health information; Final Rule. Federal Register, 2003 Feb 20; 45 CFR: Part 164.
4. U. S. Department of Health and Human Services. Standards for privacy of individually identifiable health information; Final Rule. Federal Register, 2002 Aug 12; 45 CFR: Parts 160-164.
5. European Commission. Directive 95/46/EC: the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data. 24 Oct 1995.
6. Diet of Japan. Law on the protection of personal information. 23 May 2003.
7. Office of the Federal Privacy Commissioner, Commonwealth of Australia. The commonwealth privacy amendment (private sector) act. 2001 Dec 21.
8. Rehm S and Kraft S. Electronic medical records: the FPM vendor survey. Fam Pract Manag. 2001: 8(1): 45-54.
9. Ferreira A, Cruz-Correia R, Antunes L, Farinha P, Oliveira-Palhares E, Chadwick DW, and Costa-Pereira A. How to break access control in a controlled manner. Proc IEEE CBMS 2006: pp. 847-54.
10. Youngstrom N. Nosy employees are a risk, require a wide range of remedies. Report on Patient Privacy, Atlantic Information Services. August 2005: 5(8).
11. Bouzelat H, Quantin C, and Dusserre L. Extraction and anonymity protocol of medical file. Proc AMIA Symp. 1996: pp. 323-7.
12. Quantin C, Kerkri E, Allaert FA, Bouzelat H, and Dusserre L. Security aspects of medical file regrouping for the epidemiological follow-up. Medinfo 1998: 9 (Pt 2): 1135-7.
13. Quantin C, Bouzelat H, Allaert FA, Benhamiche AM, Faivre J, and Dusserre L. Automatic record hash coding and linkage for epidemiological follow-up data confidentiality. Meth Inf Med 1998: 37(3): 271-7.
14. Berman JJ. Zero-check: a zero-knowledge protocol for reconciling patient identities across institutions. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2004; 128(3): 344-6.
15. Benaloh J and deMare M. One-way accumulators: a decentralized alternative to digital signatures. LNCS 765: Proc Eurocrypt '93. 1994: 274-86.
16. Malin B, Airoldi E, Edoho-Eket S, and Li Y. Configurable security protocols for multi-party data analysis with malicious participants. Proc IEEE ICDE 2005: pp. 533-44.
17. Chaum D. Blind signatures for untraceable payments. Advances in Cryptography, Crypto 1982. Plenum Press. 1983: pp. 199-203.
18. Grannis S, Overhage M, and McDonald C. Real world performance of approximate string comparators for use in patient matching. Medinfo 2004: 11 (Pt 1): p. 43-7.
19. Churches T and Christen P. Some methods for blindfolded record linkage. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2004: 4: 9.