The social licence for research: Why care.data ran into trouble

Journal of Medical Ethics

Volumn 41, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 404-409

  Carter, Pam ^a   Laurie, Graeme T ^b   Dixon Woods, Mary ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEICESTER   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

GREAT BRITAIN; HUMAN; LEGISLATION AND JURISPRUDENCE; RESEARCH; SOCIAL JUSTICE;

GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; RESEARCH; SOCIAL JUSTICE;

EID: 84925957965     PISSN: 03066800     EISSN: 14734257     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2014-102374     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Department of Health. Best research for best health: a new national health research strategy. The NHS contribution to health research in England. London: Department of Health, 2006.
2. Liddell A, Ayling M, Reid G. Innovation, health and wealth accelerating adoption and diffusion in the NHS. Department of Health, 2011.
3. HM Treasury and Department for Business Innovation and Skills. The plan for growth. Crown Copyright. 2011.
4. The Academy of Medical Sciences. Personal data for public good: using health information in medical research. London: The Academy of Medical Sciences, 2006.
5. Taylor M. Information governance as a force for good? Lessons to be learnt from care.data. Script Ed 2014;11(1):1-8.
6. Pollock AM, Roderick P. Trust in the time of markets: protecting patient information. Lancet 2014;383(9928):1523-4.
7. Dixon-Woods M, Ashcroft RE. Regulation and the social licence for medical research. Med Health Care Philos 2008;11:381-91.
8. Clark S, Weale A. Information governance in health. Nuffield Trust, 2011.
9. Caldicott F. Information: to share or not to share? The Information Governance Review. Crown Copyright. London: Williams Lea for the Department of Health, 2013.
10. Taylor MJ. Health research, data protection, and the public interest in notification. Med Law Rev 2011;19(2):267-303.
11. Department of Health. Research governance framework for health and social care. 2nd edn. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/ file/139565/dh_4122427.pdf (accessed 24 Oct 2014).
12. Doyal L, Tobias JS. Informed consent in medical research. London: BMJ Books, 2001.
13. Walley T. Using personal health information in medical research. BMJ 2006;332 (7534):130-1.
14. McHale J. Reforming the regulation of health research in England and Wales: new challenges: new pitfalls. J Med Law Ethics 2013;1(1):23-42.
15. Harris J. Scientific research is a moral duty. J Med Ethics 2005;31(4):242-8.
16. The Academy of Medical Sciences. A new pathway for the regulation and governance of health research. The Academy of Medical Sciences, 2011. http:// www.acmedsci.ac.uk/p99puid209.html
17. Hughes EC. Men and their work. Glencoe, Illinois: Free Press, 1958.
18. Gunningham N, Robert A, Thornton D. Social license and environmental protection: why businesses go beyond compliance. Law Soc Inq 2004;29(2):307-41.
19. Allen G. Public affairs and mining in Australia-a rescued license to operate. J Public Aff 2011;11(4):382-6.
20. Rooney D, Leach J, Ashworth P. Doing the social in social license. Soc Epistemol 2014;28(3-4):209-18.
21. Department of Health, London. NHS Constitution-the NHS belongs to us all. 2012.
22. Armstrong N, Dixon-Woods M, Thomas A, et al. Do informed consent documents for cancer trials do what they should? A study of manifest and latent functions. Sociol Health Illn 2012;34(8):1230-45.
23. Dixon-Woods M, Ashcroft RE, Jackson CJ, et al. Beyond "misunderstanding": written information and decisions about taking part in a genetic epidemiology study. Soc Sci Med 2007;65(11):2212-22.
24. Dixon-Woods M, Tarrant C. Why do people cooperate with medical research? Findings from three studies. Soc Sci Med 2009;68(12):2215-22.
25. Dixon-Woods M, Wilson D, Jackson C, et al. Human tissue and 'the public': the case of childhood cancer tumour banking. BioSocieties 2008;3(1):57-80.
26. Hill EM, Turner EL, Martin RM, et al. "Let's get the best quality research we can": public awareness and acceptance of consent to use existing data in health research: a systematic review and qualitative study. BMC Med Res Methodol 2013;13(1):1-10.
27. Kenyon S, Dixon-Woods M, Jackson CJ, et al. Participating in a trial in a critical situation: a qualitative study in pregnancy. Qual Saf Health Care 2006;15 (2):98-101.
28. Dixon-Woods M, Tarrant C, Jackson CJ, et al. Providing the results of research to participants: a mixed-method study of the benefits and challenges of a consultative approach. Clin Trials 2011;8(3):330-41.
29. Callaway E. UK push to open up patients' data. Nature 2013;502:283.
30. NHS England. Better information means better care, 2014.
31. Health and Social Care Information Centre. General Practice Extraction Service (GPES) customer requirement summary NIC-178106-MLSWX. Health and Social Care Information Centre, 2012.
32. Sciencewise. Big data: public views on the collection, sharing and use of personal data by government and companies. Sciencewise, 2014. http://www. sciencewise-erc.org.uk/cms/big-data
33. Raman S, Mohr A. A social licence for science: capturing the public or co-constructing research? Soc Epistemol 2014;28(3-4):258-76.
34. Garrety K, McLoughlin I, Wilson R, et al. National electronic health records and the digital disruption of moral orders. Soc Sci Med 2013;101(0):70-7.
35. Davidson S, McLean C, Treanor S, et al. Public acceptability of data sharing between the public, private and third sectors for research purposes. Scottish Government Social Research, 2013. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/socialresearch
36. Wellcome Trust. Towards consensus for best practice: use of patient records from general practice for research. London, 2009.
37. Stone MA, Redsell SA, Ling JT, et al. Sharing patient data: competing demands of privacy, trust and research in primary care. Br J Gen Pract 2005;55(519):783-9.
38. Perera G, Holbrook A, Thabane L, et al. Views on health information sharing and privacy from primary care practices using electronic medical records. Int J Med Inf 2011;80(2):94-101.
39. medConfidential. What's the story? 2013. http://medconfidential.org/ whats-the-story/ (accessed 7 Nov 2013).
40. Murtagh M, Thorisson G, Wallace S, et al. Navigating the perfect [data] storm. Norsk Epidemiol 2012;21(2):203-9.
41. Brown I, Brown L, Korff D. Using NHS patient data for research without consent. Law Innov Technol 2010;2(2):219-58.
42. Thomas R, Walport M. Data sharing review. Copyright Richard Thomas and Mark Walport, 2008.
43. Ohm P. Broken promises of privacy: responding to the surprising failure of anonymization. UCLA Law Rev 2010;57:1701.
44. Francis R. Report of the mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust public inquiry. London: Stationery Office, 2013. http://cdn.midstaffspublicinquiry.com/sites/default/ files/report/Executive%20summary.pdf
45. Macfarlane A, Pollock A. Opting out of care.data is not the answer. 2014. http:// www.statslife.org.uk/opinion/1210-opting-out-of-care-data-is-not-the-answer
46. Haddow G, Laurie G, Cunningham-Burley S, et al. Tackling community concerns about commercialisation and genetic research: a modest interdisciplinary proposal. Soc Sci Med 2007;64:272-82.
47. Ipsos MORI. Public Dialogue Workshops Report prepared for the Health Research Authority. Ipsos MORI, 2013.
48. Hunn A. Survey of the general public: attitudes towards health research. Health Research Authority, 2013.
49. Chalmers I, Glasziou P, Godlee F. All trials must be registered and the results published. BMJ 2013;346:f105.
50. McCartney M. Care.data: why are Scotland and Wales doing it differently? BMJ 2014;348:g1702.
51. Sethi N, Laurie GT. Delivering proportionate governance in the era of eHealth: making linkage and privacy work together. Med Law Int 2013;13 (2-3):168-204.