Data governance requirements for distributed clinical research networks: Triangulating perspectives of diverse stakeholders

Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association

Volumn 21, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 714-719

  Kim, Katherine K ^a,b   Browe, Dennis K ^a   Logan, Holly C ^a   Holm, Roberta ^c   Hack, Lori ^c   Ohno Machado, Lucila ^d  

^a SAN FRANCISCO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c Object Health LLC   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL RESEARCH; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; COMPUTER SECURITY; EXPERT SYSTEM; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH INSURANCE; HUMAN; INTERVIEW; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; MEDICAL INFORMATION; MEDICAL LITERATURE; PATIENT RIGHT; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; TRIANGULATION;

COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH; DATA SHARING; DISTRIBUTED RESEARCH NETWORK; GOVERNANCE REQUIREMENTS; STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; COMPUTER COMMUNICATION NETWORKS; COMPUTER SECURITY; CONFIDENTIALITY; HEALTH INSURANCE PORTABILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT; MODELS, ORGANIZATIONAL; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84902359050     PISSN: 10675027     EISSN: 1527974X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/amiajnl-2013-002308     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Ohmann C, Kuchinke W. Future developments of medical informatics from the viewpoint of networked clinical research. Interoperability and integration. Methods Inf Med 2009;48:45-54.
2. Brown J, Holmes J, Maro J, et al. Design specifications for network prototype and cooperative to conduct population-based studies and safety surveillance. No 13 (Prepared by the DEcIDE Centers at the HMO Research Network Center for Education and Research on Therapeutics and the University of Pennsylvania Under Contract No HHSA29020050033I T05). Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 2009.
3. Brown JS, Holmes JH, Shah K, et al. Distributed health data networks: a practical and preferred approach to ulti-institutional evaluations of comparative effectiveness, safety, and quality of care. Medical Care 2010;48:S45-51.
4. Ohno-Machado L, Day M, Kim H, et al. Standards in the use of collaborative data networks or distributed data networks in patient centered outcomes research. Technical Report for PCORI RFAs. Washington, DC: Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute, 2013.
5. Manion FJ, Robbins RJ, Weems WA, et al. Security and privacy requirements for a multi-institutional cancer research data grid: an interview-based study. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2009;9:31.
6. Grethe JS, Baru C, Gupta A, et al. Biomedical informatics research network: building a national collaboratory to hasten the derivation of new understanding and treatment of disease. Stud Health Technol Inform 2005;112:100-9.
7. Fullerton S, Anderson N, Guzauskas G, et al. Meeting the governance challenges of next-generation biorepository research. Sci Transl Med 2011;2:15cm3.
8. McGraw D. Building public trust in uses of Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act de-identified data. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2013;20:29-34.
9. National Partnership for Women & Families. Making IT meaningful: how consumers value and trust health IT. Washington, DC: National Partnership for Women & Families, 2012:32-3.
10. Ancker JS, Silver M, Miller MC, et al. Consumer experience with and attitudes toward health information technology: a nationwide survey. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2013;20:152-6.
11. Caine K, Hanania R. Patients want granular privacy control over health information in electronic medical records. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2013;20:7-15.
12. Ge Y, Ahn DK, Unde B, et al. Patient-controlled sharing of medical imaging data across unaffiliated healthcare organizations. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2013;20:157-63.
13. Pencarrick Hertzman C, Meagher N, McGrail KM. Privacy by design at population data BC: a case study describing the technical, administrative, and physical controls for privacy-sensitive secondary use of personal information for research in the public interest. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2013;20:25-8.
14. Bradford W, Hurdle JF, Lasalle B, et al. Development of a HIPAA-compliant environment for translational research data and analytics. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2014;21:185-9.
15. Mays N, Pope C. Assessing quality in qualitative research. BMJ 2000;320:50-2.
16. Morse JM. Approaches to qualitative-quantitative methodological triangulation. Nurs Res 1991;40:120-3.
17. Shih FJ. Triangulation in nursing research: issues of conceptual clarity and purpose. J Adv Nurs 1998;28:631-41.
18. Ammenwerth E, Iller C, Mansmann U. Can evaluation studies benefit from triangulation? A case study. Int J Med Inform 2003;70:237-48.
19. Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information. Nationwide Privacy and Security Framework For Electronic Exchange of Individually Identifiable Health Information. Secondary Nationwide Privacy and Security Framework For Electronic Exchange of Individually Identifiable Health Information. 2008. http://healthit.hhs. gov/portal/server.pt/community/healthit_hhs_gov__privacy___security_framework/1173.
20. Kim KK, McGraw D, Mamo L, et al. Development of a privacy and security policy framework for a multistate comparative effectiveness research network. Med Care 2013;51(8 Suppl 3):S66-72.
21. Mamo LA, Browe DK, Logan H, et al. Patient informed governance of distributed research networks: results and discussion from six patient focus groups. American Medical Informatics Association Annual Symposium; 2013.
22. McGraw D. Coping with, and Taking Advantage of, HIPAA's New Rules. Secondary Coping with, and Taking Advantage of, HIPAA's New Rules [Presentation]. 2013. http://idash.ucsd.edu/events/webinars/coping-and-taking-advantage-hipaas-new-rules.
23. Gardner J, Xiong L, Xiao Y, et al. SHARE: system design and case studies for statistical health information release. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2013;20: 109-16.
24. Jiang X, Sarwate AD, Ohno-Machado L. Privacy technology to support data sharing for comparative effectiveness research: a systematic review. Med Care 2013;51(8 Suppl 3):S58-65.
25. Ohno-Machado L. To share or not to share: that is not the question. Sci Transl Med 2012;4:165cm15.
26. Ohno-Machado L, Bafna V, Boxwala AA, et al. iDASH: integrating data for analysis, anonymization, and sharing. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2012;19:196-201.
27. Malin BA, Emam KE, O'Keefe CM. Biomedical data privacy: problems, perspectives, and recent advances. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2013;20:2-6.
28. Malin B, Benitez K, Masys D. Never too old for anonymity: a statistical standard for demographic data sharing via the HIPAA Privacy Rule. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2011;18:3-10.
29. Dwork C, Pottenger R. Toward practicing privacy. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2013;20:102-8.