Consent and confidentiality in the light of recent demands for data sharing

Biometrical Journal

Volumn 59, Issue 2, 2017, Pages 240-250

  Williams, Garrath ^a   Pigeot, Iris ^b,c  

^a LANCASTER UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b LEIBNIZ INSTITUTE FOR PREVENTION RESEARCH AND EPIDEMIOLOGY BIPS   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY OF BREMEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Data protection; Ethical review; Informed consent; Privacy; Research ethics; Trustworthiness

Indexed keywords

ETHICAL TECHNOLOGY;

CONVENTIONAL APPROACH; DATA SHARING; ETHICAL ISSUES; ETHICAL REVIEW; INDIVIDUAL LEVELS; INFORMED CONSENT; PRIVACY; RESEARCH ETHICS; RESEARCH PROCESS; TRUSTWORTHINESS;

DATA PRIVACY;

CONFIDENTIALITY; ETHICS; HUMAN; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INFORMED CONSENT; RESEARCH; STANDARDS;

CONFIDENTIALITY; HUMANS; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INFORMED CONSENT; RESEARCH;

EID: 84959038943     PISSN: 03233847     EISSN: 15214036     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/bimj.201500044     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Altman, D. G. (1980). Statistics and ethics in medical research: III How large a sample? British Medical Journal 281, 1336–1338.
2. Altman, D. G. (1994). The scandal of poor medical research. British Medical Journal 308, 283–284.
3. Baggerly, K. (2010). Disclose all data in publications. Nature 467, 401.
4. Berlin, J. A., Morris, S., Rockhold, F., Askie, L., Ghersi, D. and Waldstreicher, J. (2014). Bumps and bridges on the road to responsible sharing of clinical trial data. Clinical Trials 11, 7–12.
5. Capron, A. M. (1991). Protection of research subjects: do special rules apply in epidemiology? Law, Medicine & Health Care 19, 184–190.
6. Chalmers, I. (2005). Comment: the scandalous failure of science to cumulate evidence scientifically. Clinical Trials 2, 229–231.
7. Chalmers, I., Altman, D. G., McHaffie, H., Owens, N. and Cooke, R. W. (2013). Data sharing among data monitoring committees and responsibilities to patients and science. Trials 14, 102.
8. Chalmers, I., Dickersin, K. and Chalmers, T. C. (1992). Getting to grips with Archie Cochrane's agenda: all randomised controlled trials should be registered and reported. British Medical Journal 305, 786–788.
9. Chan, A.-W., Hróbjartsson, A., Haahr, M. T., Gøtzsche, P. C. and Altman, D. G. (2004). Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles. Journal of the American Medical Association 291, 2457–2465.
10. Chan, A.-W., Song, F., Vickers, A., Jefferson, T., Dickersin, K., Gøtzsche, P. C., Krumholz, H. M., Ghersi, D. and van der Worp, H. B. (2014). Increasing value and reducing waste: addressing inaccessible research. The Lancet 383, 257–266.
11. CIOMS (Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences) (2002). International Ethical Guidelines for Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects. Available at http://www.cioms.ch/publications/guidelines/guidelines_nov_2002_blurb.htm.
12. Clayton, E. W. (2009). Privacy and confidentiality in epidemiology: Special challenges of using information obtained without informed consent. In: S. S. Coughlin, T. L. Beauchamp and D. L. Weed (Eds.), Ethics and Epidemiology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
13. Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE Committee) (2013). Report on the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Protection of Individuals with Regard to the Processing of Personal Data and on the Free Movement of Such Data (General Data Protection Regulation). Available at http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//NONSGML+REPORT+A7-2013-0402+0+DOC+PDF+V0//EN.
14. Delgado-Rodríguez, M. and Llorca, J. (2004). Bias. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 58, 635–641.
15. Dwan, K., Gamble, C., Williamson, P. R. and Kirkham, J. J.; Reporting Bias Group (2013). Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias – an updated review. PLoS ONE 8, e66844.
16. Dwork, C. and Mulligan, D. K. (2013). It's not privacy, and it's not fair. Stanford Law Review Online 66, 35–40.
17. Elliott, C. (2010a). White Coat, Black Hat: Adventures on the Dark Side of Medicine. Beacon Press, Boston, MA.
18. Elliott, C. (2010b). Making a killing. Mother Jones 35, 54–63.
19. European Commission (2012). Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Protection of Individuals with Regard to the Processing of Personal Data and on the Free Movement of Such Data (General Data Protection Regulation). Available at http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/1/2012/EN/1-2012-11-EN-F1-1.Pdf.
20. Gigerenzer, G. (2004). Mindless statistics. The Journal of Socio-Economics 33, 587–606.
21. Gøtzsche, P. C. (2011). Why we need easy access to all data from all clinical trials and how to accomplish it. Trials 12, 249.
22. Graham, D. J., Campen, D., Hui, R., Spence, M., Cheetham, C., Levy, G., Shoor, S., and Ray, W. A. (2005). Risk of acute myocardial infarction and sudden cardiac death in patients treated with cyclo-oxygenase 2 selective and non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: nested case-control study. Lancet 365, 475–481.
23. Habre, C., Tramèr, M. R., Pöpping, D. M. and Elia, N. (2014). Ability of a meta-analysis to prevent redundant research: systematic review of studies on pain from propofol injection. British Medical Journal 348, g5219.
24. Halpern, S. D., Karlawish, J. and Berlin, J. A. (2002). The continuing unethical conduct of underpowered clinical trials. Journal of the American Medical Association 288, 358–362.
25. Healy, D. (2009). Trussed in evidence? Ambiguities at the interface between clinical evidence and clinical practice. Transcultural Psychiatry 46, 16–37.
26. Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005). Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Medicine 2, e124.
27. Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2013). Informed consent, big data, and the oxymoron of research that is not research. The American Journal of Bioethics 13, 40–42.
28. Ioannidis, J. P., Allison, D. B., Ball, C. A., Coulibaly, I., Cui, X., Culhane, A. C., Falchi, M., Furlanello, C., Game, L., Jurman, G., Mangion, J., Mehta, T., Nitzberg, M., Page, G. P., Petretto, E. and van Noort, V. (2009). Repeatability of published microarray gene expression analyses. Nature Genetics 41, 149–155.
29. Ioannidis, J. P. A., Greenland, S., Hlatky, M. A., Khoury, M. J., Macleod, M. R., Moher, D., Schulz, K. F. and Tibshirani, R. (2014). Increasing value and reducing waste in research design, conduct, and analysis. The Lancet 383, 166–175.
30. Jones, C. W., Handler, L., Crowell, K. E., Keil, L. G., Weaver, M. A. and Platt-Mills, T. F. (2013). Non-publication bias of large randomized clinical trials: cross-sectional analysis. British Medical Journal 347, f6104.
31. Kaye, J., Whitley, E. A., Lund, D., Morrison, M., Teare, H. and Melham, K. (2015). Dynamic consent: a patient interface for twenty-first century research networks. European Journal of Human Genetics 23, 141–146.
32. Kelsey, T. (2009). Long live the database state. Prospect, 29 July. Available at http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/longlivethedatabasestate.
33. Kirkham, J.J., Dwan, K., Altman, D. G., Gamble, C., Dodd, S., Smyth, R. and Williamson, P. R. (2010). The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews. British Medical Journal 340, c365.
34. Koenig, F., Slattery, J., Groves, T., Lang, T., Benjamini, Y., Day, S., Bauer, P. and Posch, M. (2015). Sharing clinical trial data on patient level: opportunities and challenges. Biometrical Journal 57, 8–26.
35. Lehman, R. and Loder, E. (2012). Missing clinical trial data. British Medical Journal 344, d8158.
36. Lundh, A., Sismondo, S., Lexchin, J., Busuioc, O. A. and Bero, L. (2012). Industry sponsorship and research outcome. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 12, MR000033.
37. Manson, N. C. and O'Neill, O. (2007). Rethinking Informed Consent in Bioethics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
38. McGauran, N., Wieseler, B., Kreis, J., Schüler, Y.-B., Kölsch, H. and Kaiser, T. (2010). Reporting bias in medical research – a narrative review. Trials 11, 37.
39. Miller, F. G. (2008). Research on medical records without informed consent. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 36, 560–566.
40. Neutra, R. R., Cohen, A., Fletcher, T., Michaels, D., Richter, E. D. and Soskolne, C. L. (2006). Toward guidelines for the ethical reanalysis and reinterpretation of another's research. Epidemiology 17, 335–338.
41. Ohm, P. (2010). Broken promises of privacy: responding to the surprising failure of anonymization. UCLA Law Review 57, 1701–1777.
42. O'Neill, O. (2002). Autonomy and Trust in Bioethics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
43. Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Kirkham, J., Dwan, K., Kramer, S., Green, S. and Forbes, A. (2014). Bias due to selective inclusion and reporting of outcomes and analyses in systematic reviews of randomised trials of healthcare interventions. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 10, MR000035.
44. Parker, M. (2005). When is research on patient records without consent ethical? Journal of Health Services Research & Policy 10, 183–186.
45. Richards, N. M. and Solove, D. J. (2007). Privacy's other path: recovering the law of confidentiality. Georgetown Law Journal 96, 123–182.
46. Ross, J. S., Gross, C. P. and Krumholz, H. M. (2012). Promoting transparency in pharmaceutical industry-sponsored research. American Journal of Public Health 102, 72–80.
47. Rothstein, M. A. (2010). Is deidentification sufficient to protect health privacy in research? The American Journal of Bioethics 10, 3–11.
48. Rothstein, M. A. and Shoben, A. B. (2013). Does consent bias research? The American Journal of Bioethics 13, 27–37.
49. The Royal Society (2012). Science as an Open Enterprise. London. Available at https://royalsociety.org/policy/projects/science-public-enterprise/Report/.
50. Sackett, D. L. (1979). Bias in analytic research. Journal of Chronic Diseases 32, 51–63.
51. Safer, D. J. (2002). Design and reporting modifications in industry-sponsored comparative psychopharmacology trials. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 190, 583–592.
52. Saini, P., Loke, Y. K., Gamble, C., Altman, D. G., Williamson, P. R. and Kirkham, J. J. (2014). Selective reporting bias of harm outcomes within studies: findings from a cohort of systematic reviews. British Medical Journal 349, g6501.
53. Siegler, M. (1982). Confidentiality in medicine – a decrepit concept. New England Journal of Medicine 307, 1518–1521.
54. Solove, D. J. (2013). Privacy self-management and the consent dilemma. Harvard Law Review 126, 1880–1903.
55. Stamatakis, E., Weiler, R. and Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2013). Undue industry influences that distort healthcare research, strategy, expenditure and practice: a review. European Journal of Clinical Investigation 43, 469–475.
56. World Medical Association (1964). Human experimentation: code of ethics of the World Medical Association – Declaration of Helsinki. British Medical Journal 2, 177.
57. World Medical Association (2013). WMA Declaration of Helsinki – Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects (7th revision). Available at http://www.wma.net/en/30publications/10policies/b3.