↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
74 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Using routinely collected health data for surveillance, quality improvement and research: Framework and key questions to assess ethics, privacy and data access.
Published in
BMJ Health & Care Informatics, January 2016
DOI 10.14236/jhi.v22i4.845
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The use of health data for public health, surveillance, quality improvement and research is crucial to improve health systems and health care. However, bodies responsible for privacy and ethics often limit access to routinely collected health data. Ethical approvals, issues around protecting privacy and data access are often dealt with by different layers of regulations, making approval processes appear disjointed. To create a comprehensive framework for defining the ethical and privacy status of a project and for providing guidance on data access. The framework comprises principles and related questions. The core of the framework will be built using standard terminology definitions such as ethics-related controlled vocabularies and regional directives. It is built in this way to reduce ambiguity between different definitions. The framework is extensible: principles can be retired or added to, as can their related questions. Responses to these questions should allow data processors to define ethical issues, privacy risk and other unintended consequences. The framework contains three steps: (1) identifying possible ethical and privacy principles relevant to the project; (2) providing ethics and privacy guidance questions that inform the type of approval needed; and (3) assessing case-specific ethics and privacy issues. The outputs from this process should inform whether the balance between public interests and privacy breach and any ethical considerations are tipped in favour of societal benefits. If they are then this should be the basis on which data access is permitted. Tightly linking ethical principles to governance and data access may help maintain public trust.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
Saudi Arabia 1 1%
Netherlands 1 1%
Unknown 70 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 9%
Researcher 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Other 14 19%
Unknown 20 27%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 22%
Computer Science 10 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 11%
Social Sciences 7 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 4%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 23 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 July 2021.
All research outputs
#31,221,391
of 34,404,538 outputs
Outputs from BMJ Health & Care Informatics
#483
of 499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#394,929
of 448,953 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMJ Health & Care Informatics
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,404,538 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 499 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 448,953 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.