DOCSLIB.ORG

Dynamic Consent WORKSHOP REPORT

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Dynamic Consent WORKSHOP REPORT Dynamic Consent WORKSHOP REPORT Exploring new ways for patients to consent for research & use of health data 27th November 2014 Caroline Sanders – Senior Lecturer, Medical Sociology Tjeerd Van Staa – Professor of Health eResearch Karen Spencer – Research Associate Lamiece Hassan – Patient and Public Involvement & Governance Research Officer Hawys Williams – Arthritis Research UK Centre for Epidemiology Patient & public collaborators: Jo Rose, Peter Rose, AnnMarie Lewis, Anne Brown, Steve Anslow, David Giles Will Dixon (Principal Investigator) – Director of the Arthritis Research UK Centre for Epidemiology Funded by a Medical Research Council award (MR/K006665/1) to the Health eResearch Centre (HeRC) at the University of Manchester 1 Summary Background Reusing anonymised health data from patient records provides opportunities for advancing health research. However, the media and some members of the public have raised concerns. Our current area of research explores patient views on the use of anonymous electronic patient records for research purposes. In particular, we have been exploring a new model known as ‘dynamic consent’, which would allow individuals to give consent to use their anonymised data for specific purposes (e.g. specific research projects). People could also access feedback about research results, view who had access to their data and change consent preferences over time. To explore the practicalities, we developed a prototype of an electronic ‘dynamic consent’ system for tablet devices that could be used in clinical settings. The Workshop We held a workshop at The University of Manchester on 27th November 2014, and 30 members of the public attended. The aim was to explore public views on the electronic dynamic consent system. We explained key concepts and discussed two scenarios where dynamic consent could be used. Attendees also had used and discussed a prototype of the electronic system using a tablet device. Key Messages Positive feedback included: • Attendees were positive about sharing anonymised health data for research purposes • Many liked the idea of having greater control of their data and could see themselves using the electronic system • Most valuable feature was personal feedback on how data had been used for research – this was seen as novel and would make people feel valued Considerations and concerns raised included: • Uncertainty about the degree to which people would actually specify consent preferences • The need for technical support, in person, for new users and those with particular needs • In clinical settings, a private space (or booths) should be available for people to use the system • Information should be tiered and provided in appropriate formats (e.g. balloons and flow diagrams) to allow different users to access more/less information as needed • Information/ reassurance needed about data security and confidentiality within the system Future Plans The findings from the workshop are currently feeding into a proposal for further research into developing and implementing a dynamic consent system for use in clinical settings. The plans include a co-design approach with patients and carers to make the system more user-friendly and provide appropriate information in suitable formats. A pilot study will also be designed, using private booths supplemented by support from staff and/or volunteers. (A poster format of this summary is available – see Appendix 1) 2 Introduction Whilst opportunities exist for extending the use of personal health data for research, media debates have flagged concerns about trust in the re-use of data (e.g. care.data). Negative views have mainly been articulated by key high profile individuals/ groups, and are not necessarily representative of the wider population. We are currently conducting research to explore patient views on the use of anonymous electronic patient records for research purposes, and exploring the potential use of a new and innovative model for enabling greater personal control regarding the use of such data, known as ‘dynamic consent’. Dynamic consent enables patients to give consent to use their data for specific purposes (e.g. specific research projects). Importantly, patients are not restricted to giving a universal consent for use of data, versus a universal ‘opt out’. They can also change consent status over time. We have explored this concept and the practicalities using an electronic prototype via tablet devices that could be used in clinical settings. The research has generated further questions and ideas which we aimed to explore further in a workshop with patients and members of the public, in order to inform development of a further research proposal to implement and evaluate dynamic consent. The workshop was held on the 27th November 2014. The aim was to explore public views on the circumstances and mechanisms for consent to participation in research, and the generation and use of personal health data via an electronic system for dynamic consent. This report summarises the main points of view expressed by workshop participants in relation to key questions and topics. 3 Attendees and summary of activities Twenty-five members of the public attended having been recruited via existing personal networks, patient and public involvement groups and social media. Key concepts relating to dynamic consent were explained using a brief slide presentation and a short video. The video can be viewed using the following link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=duFb4IfuOpQ The ‘Dynamic Consent’ electronic system was explained: Using a tablet device (like an iPad), the new system would allow patients to keep track of their data, including a record of who had used their health data for research and reasons why it had been used. Small group discussions were then facilitated by members of the project team and two scenarios incorporating dynamic consent for using electronic health records for research purposes were introduced: one in a hospital outpatient setting and the other in primary care, considering permissions for sharing electronic patient records and consent for pragmatic trials, respectively. In addition, attendees were given a working prototype of the electronic interface to test themselves on a tablet. Facilitators probed views on proposed procedures for obtaining dynamic consent using the electronic interface, including the content and format of information, consent options provided and wider contextual factors (e.g. internet access). 4 Case Studies Case study 1: Sharing electronic patient records for research purposes Mrs Barker is attending her local hospital outpatients department to see her rheumatologist about her arthritis. She sees the nurse to have her blood pressure measured before she sits down in the waiting area to see the consultant. She is then approached by one of the research nurses and directed to a new Research Booth. She goes over to the Research Booth where there is a touch screen. On pressing the screen, she sees an introductory video to explain how her electronic patient records might be used for research. After identifying herself securely, she then is offered the opportunity to opt out. It is explained that, were she to be willing for her data to be shared, then this Research Booth will show her who has accessed her anonymised data, and what the results of that research have been. Discussion questions for case study 1 • What information do you need in the introduction? • How should this be formatted? (ie video, text, audio) • Are you happy with identifying yourself on a touchscreen (like in a GP check-in)? • Would you want to select who to share your data with? Or happy to do generic non-opt out? • What information would you like fed back about the data recipients? • What information would you like fed back about the research results? • Can the booth be stand-alone? Or do you need support? If so, from whom? 5 Discussion summary for case study 1 Key points fed back in whole group discussion: • Information should be layered, perhaps using a flowchart – e.g. ‘press here if you…’ This will enable people to access different levels of information and instructions according to preference and need. Some people would want a lot of detail and others will want much more basic • Need to consider who are the recipients/ users and what parts of the system do they want to use • The system is user friendly, but not everyone will have the skills to use it • It is important to consider privacy when deciding where to place devices – If in waiting rooms, private booths would be helpful • Private booths would also be helpful because people feel stressed and under pressure if people are watching over their shoulder • It is important to consider practical things like height and support for people with different needs. For example, people may be wheelchair users, or have a visual or hearing impairment. Also, need to consider whether people have mental capacity to make decisions about consent. • Someone should be available to offer hands on support – this could be a research nurse, a volunteer, perhaps a student, someone who could be an IT champion. • People were very positive about being able to receive feedback about research conducted using their health data. This was viewed to make people feel valued • Having access to short written summaries and options to watch short videos thought to be useful. 6 Elaboration of main points and additional discussion points from small groups • Participants agreed that the system was user friendly. However, they commented that there was no explanation behind some of the headings and some people may need further explanations to understand what they are agreeing to. Information buttons would help. • It might be useful to have a bank of ‘frequently asked questions’ and options to obtain balloon style information to provide additional explanations. A flow chart and visual description of the process would be helpful. • The application should work with people’s mobile phones and support tracking for: circumstances in which consent was granted; level of access granted; beneficiaries of access.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • An Online, Dynamic Consent and Participant Engagement Platform Working Towards Solving the Complexities of Consent in Genomic Research
    European Journal of Human Genetics (2021) 29:687–698 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-020-00782-w ARTICLE ‘CTRL’: an online, Dynamic Consent and participant engagement platform working towards solving the complexities of consent in genomic research 1,2 3 4 5 6,7 7 Matilda A. Haas ● Harriet Teare ● Megan Prictor ● Gabi Ceregra ● Miranda E. Vidgen ● David Bunker ● 3,4 1,2 Jane Kaye ● Tiffany Boughtwood Received: 2 July 2020 / Revised: 9 November 2020 / Accepted: 18 November 2020 / Published online: 6 January 2021 © The Author(s) 2021. This article is published with open access Abstract The complexities of the informed consent process for participating in research in genomic medicine are well-documented. Inspired by the potential for Dynamic Consent to increase participant choice and autonomy in decision-making, as well as the opportunities for ongoing participant engagement it affords, we wanted to trial Dynamic Consent and to do so developed our own web-based application (web app) called CTRL (control). This paper documents the design and development of CTRL, for use in the Australian Genomics study: a health services research project building evidence to inform the 1234567890();,: 1234567890();,: integration of genomic medicine into mainstream healthcare. Australian Genomics brought together a multi-disciplinary team to develop CTRL. The design and development process considered user experience; security and privacy; the application of international standards in data sharing; IT, operational and ethical issues. The CTRL tool is now being offered to participants in the study, who can use CTRL to keep personal and contact details up to date; make consent choices (including indicate preferences for return of results and future research use of biological samples, genomic and health data); follow their progress through the study; complete surveys, contact the researchers and access study news and information.
    [Show full text]
  • Dynamic Consent in the Digital Age of Biology: Online Initiatives and Regulatory Considerations
    ETHICS Dynamic consent in the digital age of biology: online initiatives and regulatory considerations Richman Wee LLM;1 Mark Henaghan BA, LLB (Hons);2 Ingrid Winship MBChB, MD3 ‘Dynamic consent’ is discussed in this second article of a two-part series examining projects that have developed the concept in order to manage the use of information and samples in the health context. The first article was published in the September 2013 issue of the Journal of Primary Health Care.1 ere, online initiatives by two private collection of phenotype data and other per- 1 New Zealand Law companies, 23andMe and PatientsLikeMe, sonal information through web-based surveys, Foundation Centre for Law and Policy in Emerging that utilise a system of dynamic consent in order to perform genome-wide association Technologies, Faculty of H 3 for the collection and use of a large volume of studies (GWAS). In March 2012, 23andMe Law, University of Otago, health and medical data, are discussed. Based reported having DNA data for approximately New Zealand on the overseas projects discussed in these two 200 000 customers (with nearly 90% having 2 Dean of Law, Faculty of Law, online initiatives and the projects discussed in opted in to participate in research), and more University of Otago the first article, a description of the essential than 90 million individual survey responses or 3 Royal Melbourne Hospital 4 characteristics for the new and evolving concept ‘phenotypic data points’. An earlier announce- and Department of Medicine, of dynamic consent will be offered. In addition, ment by 23andMe stated that from a total of University of Melbourne, new possibilities as well as limitations will be about 100 000 customers, around 76% agreed Melbourne, Australia noted.
    [Show full text]
  • Informed Consent
    Ethics of Biobanking Robert E Rosenthal MD Section of Hyperbaric Medicine RAC Shock Trauma Center PRE-CONFERENCE PROGRAM Contemporary Issues in Biobanking: Governance, Consent, and Practical Approaches to Current Challenges Biobanking: Definition “Biobank” first appeared in scientific literature in 1996. What is a Biobank? 303 survey responses from managers of sample collections There is consensus that the term biobank may be applied to biological collections of human, animal, plant or microbial samples; and that the term biobank should only be applied to sample collections with associated sample data, and to collections that are managed according to professional standards. There was no consensus on whether a collection's purpose, size or level of access should determine whether it is called a biobank. Hewitt R, and Watson P . Biopreservation and Biobanking. 2013, 11(5): 309-315 Biobank: Examples Small, Disease Specific Collections Cooperative Federal Projects Prospectively Collecting Samples Established in 1987 via NCI Support Funded Through March 31, 2019 Goal: Provide biomedical researchers with wide variety of high quality, well characterized human tissues to support cancer research Credit for success measured not by banking but by specimens distributed to researchers. Biobanking: Scope > 300 million tissue samples in US Banks at turn of the century. Samples increasing by 20 million/yr Eiseman, E. & Haga, S. Handbook of Human Tissue Sources (RAND, 1999). A 2011 survey of >700 cancer researchers found that 47% had trouble finding samples of sufficient quality, and must limit scope of investigation. Massett, H. A. et al. J. Natl Cancer Inst. Monogr. 2011, 8–15 (2011). Biobanking Benefits Stored samples will be used for the development of products and services that promote public health.
    [Show full text]
  • A Blockchain Solution for Dynamic Consent in Biobanking
    European Journal of Human Genetics (2020) 28:609–626 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-019-0560-9 ARTICLE Dwarna: a blockchain solution for dynamic consent in biobanking 1 1,2,3 1 4 1 Nicholas Mamo ● Gillian M. Martin ● Maria Desira ● Bridget Ellul ● Jean-Paul Ebejer Received: 31 May 2019 / Revised: 13 November 2019 / Accepted: 26 November 2019 / Published online: 16 December 2019 © The Author(s) 2019. This article is published with open access Abstract Dynamic consent aims to empower research partners and facilitate active participation in the research process. Used within the context of biobanking, it gives individuals access to information and control to determine how and where their biospecimens and data should be used. We present Dwarna—a web portal for ‘dynamic consent’ that acts as a hub connecting the different stakeholders of the Malta Biobank: biobank managers, researchers, research partners, and the general public. The portal stores research partners’ consent in a blockchain to create an immutable audit trail of research partners’ consent changes. Dwarna’s structure also presents a solution to the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation’s right to erasure—a right that is seemingly incompatible with the blockchain model. Dwarna’s transparent structure increases trustworthiness in the biobanking process by giving research partners more control over which research studies they participate in, by facilitating the withdrawal of consent and by making it possible to request that the biospecimen 1234567890();,: 1234567890();,: and associated data are destroyed. Introduction alongside links to personal health and lifestyle data to be used by researchers in scientific studies [1].
    [Show full text]
  • Reflections on Dynamic Consent in Biomedical Research
    European Journal of Human Genetics (2021) 29:649–656 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-020-00771-z ARTICLE Reflections on dynamic consent in biomedical research: the story so far 1 2 1,2 Harriet J. A. Teare ● Megan Prictor ● Jane Kaye Received: 16 July 2020 / Revised: 30 September 2020 / Accepted: 22 October 2020 / Published online: 28 November 2020 © The Author(s) 2020. This article is published with open access Abstract Dynamic consent (DC) was originally developed in response to challenges to the informed consent process presented by participants agreeing to ‘future research’ in biobanking. In the past 12 years, it has been trialled in a number of different projects, and examined as a new approach for consent and to support patient engagement over time. There have been significant societal shifts during this time, namely in our reliance on digital tools and the use of social media, as well as a greater appreciation of the integral role of patients in biomedical research. This paper reflects on the development of DC to understand its importance in an age where digital health is becoming the norm and patients require greater oversight and control of how their data may be used in a range of settings. As well as looking back, it looks forwards to consider how DC could be further 1234567890();,: 1234567890();,: utilised to enhance the patient experience and address some of the inequalities caused by the digital divide in society. Introduction digital technologies can support and enhance existing pro- cedures and relationships in healthcare and biomedical Digital health on the whole has been slow to progress research.
    [Show full text]
  • Your Data, Your Choice: a Design Jam on Modernizing Health Care Consent Models to Unlock Health
    Your Data Your Choice A Design Jam on Modernizing Health Care Consent Models to Unlock Health Innovation Holly Etchegary PhD Assistant Professor Faculty of Medicine Memorial University [email protected] Angela Power Director, Data Ethics & Privacy Newfoundland & Labrador Centre for Health Information [email protected] Executive Summary 3 Introduction 5 What We Did 10 What We Found 16 Implications and Future Work 36 In collaboration with Acknowledgements Thank you to the Working Group who worked tirelessly to make the Design Jam a success: Daryl Pullman & Brenda Wilson, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University; Mike Bannister, Donna Roche & Don MacDonald at the Newfoundland and Labrador Centre for Health Information; Farah McCrate and Sharon Newman at Eastern Health; Sandra Veenstra & Chandra Kavanagh at the Health Research Ethics Authority; Sarah Wickham at Canada Health Infoway; and, Mandy Woodland from Bounce Innovation & Hacking Health Also, a big thank you to the Privacy team at NLCHI for helping set up for the Design Jam event and to Dr. Charlene Simmonds and Mercy Funded by Dhlakama from the Health Research Unit, Memorial University and Perfect Day for their assistance in preparing this report. Executive Summary Health innovation and research can enhance healthcare and the services offered to patients across Canada. At the same time privacy protections are essential. We want to ensure that individuals maintain control of their information and that patients are willing to continue to participate in the health innovation and research ecosystem. Privacy must be supported as an enabler of innovation, not a barrier to it. This requires a shift in dialogue and an overall innovative approach to a dynamic consent process that ensures transparency and trust are at the heart of new technology and innovation.
    [Show full text]
  • Contextual Consent: Ethical Mining of Social Media for Health Research
    Contextual Consent: Ethical Mining of Social Media for Health Research Chris Norval Tristan Henderson School of Computer Science School of Computer Science University of St Andrews University of St Andrews St Andrews, Fife, UK St Andrews, Fife, UK [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT college students [24]. Such findings can help researchers and Social media are a rich source of insight for data mining and user- practitioners identify important markers in health and in society. centred research, but the question of consent arises when studying Despite these advantages, those who created the social data in such data without the express knowledge of the creator. Case question are not always informed about the process. While some studies that mine social data from users of online services such as researchers outline clear methods of obtaining informed consent Facebook and Twitter are becoming increasingly common. This when conducting research on social media data (e.g. [24]), only has led to calls for an open discussion into how researchers can around 5% of the literature that use such data describe their consent best use these vast resources to make innovative findings while still procedures [12]. respecting fundamental ethical principles. In this position paper Some have argued that social data posted online are freely we highlight some key considerations for this topic and argue that available for research [9]; however, others argue that just because the conditions of informed consent are often not being met, and personal information is made available online does not mean it that using social media data that some deem free to access and is appropriate to capture and analyse [2, 4, 11, 35].
    [Show full text]
  • Towards 'Engagement 2.0': Insights from a Study of Dynamic Consent with Biobank Participants
    Harriet JA Teare, Michael Morrison, Edgar A Whitley and Jane Kaye Towards 'engagement 2.0': insights from a study of dynamic consent with biobank participants Article (Published version) (Refereed) Original citation: Teare, Harriet, Morrison, M., Whitley, Edgar A. and Kaye, Jane (2015) Towards 'engagement 2.0': insights from a study of dynamic consent with biobank participants. Digital Health. ISSN 2055-2076 DOI: 10.1177/2055207615605644 Reuse of this item is permitted through licensing under the Creative Commons: © 2015 The Authors CC BY-NC 3.0 This version available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/63278/ Available in LSE Research Online: Online: October 2015 LSE has developed LSE Research Online so that users may access research output of the School. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. You may freely distribute the URL (http://eprints.lse.ac.uk) of the LSE Research Online website. DIGITAL HEALTH Original Article Digital Health 2015, Vol. 0(0) 1–13 ! The Author(s) 2015 Towards ‘Engagement 2.0’: Insights from a study Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav of dynamic consent with biobank participants DOI: 10.1177/2055207615605644 dhj.sagepub.com Harriet JA Teare1, Michael Morrison1, Edgar A Whitley2 and Jane Kaye1 Abstract Web 2.0 technologies have enabled new methods of engagement, moving from static mono-directional sources of infor- mation to interactive user-led experiences. Use of Web 2.0 technologies for engagement is gaining momentum within the health sector however this is still in its infancy in biobanking research.
    [Show full text]
  • Adding Dynamic Consent to a Longitudinal Cohort Study: a Qualitative Study of EXCEED Participant Perspectives Susan E
    Wallace and Miola BMC Med Ethics (2021) 22:12 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-021-00583-w RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access Adding dynamic consent to a longitudinal cohort study: A qualitative study of EXCEED participant perspectives Susan E. Wallace1* and José Miola2 Abstract Background: Dynamic consent has been proposed as a process through which participants and patients can gain more control over how their data and samples, donated for biomedical research, are used, resulting in greater trust in researchers. It is also a way to respond to evolving data protection frameworks and new legislation. Others argue that the broad consent currently used in biobank research is ethically robust. Little empirical research with cohort study participants has been published. This research investigated the participants’ opinions of adding a dynamic consent interface to their existing study. Methods: Adult participants in the Extended Cohort for E-health, Environment and DNA (EXCEED) longitudinal cohort study who are members of the EXCEED Public and Participant Engagement Group were recruited. Four focus groups were conducted and analysed for thematic content. Discussion topics were derived from a review of the cur- rent literature on dynamic consent. Results: Participants were in favour of many aspects of a dynamic consent interface, such as being able to update their information, add additional data to their records and choose withdrawal options. They were supportive pro- vided it was simple to use and not intrusive. Participants expressed a markedly high level of trust in the study and its investigators and were unanimously happy with their current participation. No strong support was found for adding a dynamic consent interface to EXCEED.
    [Show full text]
  • Biomedical Big Data: New Models of Control Over Access, Use and Governance
    Bioethical Inquiry (2017) 14:501–513 DOI 10.1007/s11673-017-9809-6 SYMPOSIUM: ETHICS AND EPISTEMOLOGY OF BIG DATA Biomedical Big Data: New Models of Control Over Access, Use and Governance Effy Vayena & Alessandro Blasimme Received: 21 March 2017 /Accepted: 24 August 2017 /Published online: 5 October 2017 # The Author(s) 2017. This article is an open access publication Abstract Empirical evidence suggests that while peo- through direct involvement in data governance. We ple hold the capacity to control their data in high regard, conclude by suggesting that, despite the impression that they increasingly experience a loss of control over their biomedical big data diminish individual control, the data in the online world. The capacity to exert control synergistic effect of new data management models can over the generation and flow of personal information is a in fact improve it. fundamental premise to important values such as auton- omy, privacy, and trust. In healthcare and clinical re- Keywords Big Data . Control . Ethics . Privacy. search this capacity is generally achieved indirectly, by Informed consent . Governance agreeing to specific conditions of informational expo- sure. Such conditions can be openly stated in informed consent documents or be implicit in the norms of con- 1. Introduction fidentiality that govern the relationships of patients and healthcare professionals. However, with medicine be- Large reams of data are generated, collected, and proc- coming a data-intense enterprise, informed consent and essed each day for an indefinite variety of purposes. A medical confidentiality, as mechanisms of control, are portion of these data is the output of scientific experi- put under pressure.
    [Show full text]
  • Research Participants' Perceptions and Views on Consent for Biobank Research: a Review of Empirical Data and Ethical Analysis
    D’Abramo et al. BMC Medical Ethics (2015) 16:60 DOI 10.1186/s12910-015-0053-5 RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access Research participants’ perceptions and views on consent for biobank research: a review of empirical data and ethical analysis Flavio D’Abramo1,2†, Jan Schildmann1*† and Jochen Vollmann1 Abstract Background: Appropriate information and consent has been one of the most intensely discussed topics within the context of biobank research. In parallel to the normative debate, many socio-empirical studies have been conducted to gather experiences, preferences and views of patients, healthy research participants and further stakeholders. However, there is scarcity of literature which connects the normative debate about justifications for different consent models with findings gained in empirical research. In this paper we discuss findings of a limited review of socio-empirical research on patients’ and healthy research participants’ experiences and views regarding consent to biobank research in light of ethical principles for appropriate information and consent. Methods: Review question: Which empirical data are available on research participants’ perceptions and views regarding information and elicitation of consent for biobank research? Search of articles published till March 1st 2014 in Pubmed. Review of abstracts and potentially relevant full text articles by two authors independently. As categories for content analysis we defined (i) understanding or recall of information, (ii) preferences regarding information or consent, and (iii) research participants’ concerns. Results: The search in Pubmed yielded 337 abstracts of which 10 articles were included in this study. Approaches to information and consent varied considerably across the selected studies. The majority of research participants opted for some version of limited consent when being informed about such possibility.
    [Show full text]
  • Dynamic Consent: a Possible Solution to Improve Patient Confidence and Trust in How Electronic Patient Records Are Used in Medical Research
    Hawys Williams, Karen Spencer, Caroline Sanders, David Lund, Edgar A Whitley, Jane Kaye, William G Dixon Dynamic consent: a possible solution to improve patient confidence and trust in how electronic patient records are used in medical research Article (Published version) (Refereed) Original citation: Williams, Hawys, Spencer, Karen, Sanders, Caroline, Lund, David, Whitley, Edgar A., Kaye, Jane and Dixon, William G. (2015) Dynamic consent: a possible solution to improve patient confidence and trust in how electronic patient records are used in medical research. JMIR Medical Informatics, 3 (1). e3. ISSN 2291-9694 DOI: 10.2196/medinform.3525 © 2015 The Authors © CC BY 2.0 This version available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/60754/ Available in LSE Research Online: January 2015 JMIR MEDICAL INFORMATICS Williams et al Viewpoint Dynamic Consent: A Possible Solution to Improve Patient Confidence and Trust in How Electronic Patient Records Are Used in Medical Research Hawys Williams1, PhD; Karen Spencer2, PhD; Caroline Sanders2, PhD; David Lund3, PhD; Edgar A Whitley4, PhD; Jane Kaye5, PhD; William G Dixon1,6, PhD 1Arthritis Research UK Centre for Epidemiology, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom 2Centre for Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom 3HW Communications, Lancaster, United Kingdom 4Department of Management, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, United Kingdom 5HeLEX - Centre for Health, Law and Emerging Technologies, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom 6Health eResearch Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom Corresponding Author: William G Dixon, PhD Arthritis Research UK Centre for Epidemiology University of Manchester Stopford Building Oxford Rd Manchester, M13 9PT United Kingdom Phone: 44 2751642 Fax: 44 2755044 Email: [email protected] Abstract With one million people treated every 36 hours, routinely collected UK National Health Service (NHS) health data has huge potential for medical research.
    [Show full text]