Personal health records: Consumer attitudes toward privacy and security of their personal health information

Health Informatics Journal

Volumn 17, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 63-71

  Beranek Lafky, Deborah ^a   Horan, Thomas A ^a  

^a CLAREMONT GRADUATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

personal health records; PHR; privacy; security

Indexed keywords

ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; COMPUTER SECURITY; HUMAN; MEDICAL RECORD; PRIVACY; PSYCHOLOGY; STANDARDS;

ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; COMPUTER SECURITY; HEALTH RECORDS, PERSONAL; HUMANS; PRIVACY;

EID: 79954599450     PISSN: 14604582     EISSN: 17412811     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1460458211399403     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Secretary of Health and Human Services Michael O. Leavitt. Testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee. Washington, DC, 2007.
2. Manhattan Research. Cybercitizen health v8.0. New York, 2009.
3. Rogers EM Diffusion of innovation. 5 th edn. New York: Free Press, 2003.
4. Davis FD Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quart 1989 ; 13 (3). 319-340.
5. Venkatesh V., and Davis F. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Man Sci 2000 ; 46 (2). 186-204. (Pubitemid 30594361)
6. Fisher B., and Britten N. Patient access to records: expectations of hospital doctors and experiences of cancer patients. Brit J Gen Practice 1993 ; 43 (367). 52-56. (Pubitemid 23079659)
7. Solomon C. The mother's bond. Sonoma, CA: Follow Me, undated.
8. Lafky D., Tulu B., and Horan TA A user-driven approach to personal health records. Commun AIS 2006 ; 17 ( 46 ).
9. Lafky D. Personal health records: an empirical user taxonomy. In: School of Information Systems and Technology, Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, CA, 2008.
10. Lafky D., and Horan TA Toward a taxonomy of personal health records users. In: Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS), AIS, Acapulco, Mexico, 2006.
11. Fox S. Demographic realities and consumer behavior online. Pew Internet & American Life Project, Editor, Pew Charitable Trusts, Washington, DC, 2007.
12. Green PE, and Srinivasan V. Conjoint analysis in marketing: new developments with implications for research and practice. J Marketing 1990 ; 54 (4). 3-19.
13. Fraenkel L., Bodardus S., and Wittink DR Understanding patient preferences for the treatment of lupus nephritis with adaptive conjoint analysis. Med Care 2001 ; 39 (11). 1203-1216.
14. Ryan M., and Farrar S. Using conjoint analysis to elicit preferences for health care. BMJ 2000 ; 320: 1530-1533. (Pubitemid 30330316)
15. Malhotra NK, and Jain AK A conjoint analysis approach to health care marketing and planning. J Health Care Marketing 1982 ; 2 (2). 35-44.
16. Kolodner RM Developing a privacy and security framework. Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC, 2007.
17. Peel DC Review of the personal health record (PHR) service provider market: privacy and security 2007. http://www.patientprivacyrights.org/site/ News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6811.
18. Goldman J. Personal health records: employers proceed with caution. California Healthcare Foundation, Oakland, CA, 2007.
19. Peel DC Testimony before the Judiciary Committee's Constitution Subcommittee, United States House of Representatives: Hearing on Genetic Privacy, 2002.
20. Gellman R. Personal health records: why many PHRs threaten privacy. In: World Privacy Forum, 2008. 21. Stolberg SG Health identifier for all Americans runs into hurdles. New York Times 1998: A.1.
21. National Committee on Vital and Health Statistics. Enhancing protections for uses of health data: a stewardship framework. US Department of Health and Human Services, editor, Washington, DC, 2008.
22. Martin L. Understanding and managing risk. ISSA J 2007: 8-12.
23. Greenberg A. The privacy paradox. In: Forbes 2008.
24. Acquisti A., and Grossklags J. Privacy and rationality in individual decision making. IEEE Secur Priv 2005 ; 3 (1). 26-33. (Pubitemid 40325579)
25. Norberg PA, Horne DR, and Horne DA The privacy paradox: personal information disclosure intentions versus behaviors. J Consumer Aff, 2007. Online.
26. Schulz R., and Decker S. Long-term adjustment to physical disability: the role of social support, perceived control, and self-blame. J Personality & Soc Psych 1985 ; 48 ( 5 ).
27. National Science Foundation. Science and engineering indicators, B. Directorate for Social and Economic Sciences ; Division of Science Resources Statistics, Editor, 2002.
28. Feinberg M. Hidden bias to responsible bias: an approach to information systems based on Haraway's situated knowledges. Inf Res 2007 ; 12 ( 4).