↓ Skip to main content

Balancing Benefits and Risks of Immortal Data

Overview of attention for article published in The Hastings Center Report, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
15 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
92 Mendeley
Title
Balancing Benefits and Risks of Immortal Data
Published in
The Hastings Center Report, December 2015
DOI 10.1002/hast.523
Pubmed ID
Authors

Oscar A Zarate, Julia Green Brody, Phil Brown, Mónica D Ramirez-Andreotta, Laura Perovich, Jacob Matz

Abstract

An individual's health, genetic, or environmental-exposure data, placed in an online repository, creates a valuable shared resource that can accelerate biomedical research and even open opportunities for crowd-sourcing discoveries by members of the public. But these data become "immortalized" in ways that may create lasting risk as well as benefit. Once shared on the Internet, the data are difficult or impossible to redact, and identities may be revealed by a process called data linkage, in which online data sets are matched to each other. Reidentification (re-ID), the process of associating an individual's name with data that were considered deidentified, poses risks such as insurance or employment discrimination, social stigma, and breach of the promises often made in informed-consent documents. At the same time, re-ID poses risks to researchers and indeed to the future of science, should re-ID end up undermining the trust and participation of potential research participants. The ethical challenges of online data sharing are heightened as so-called big data becomes an increasingly important research tool and driver of new research structures. Big data is shifting research to include large numbers of researchers and institutions as well as large numbers of participants providing diverse types of data, so the participants' consent relationship is no longer with a person or even a research institution. In addition, consent is further transformed because big data analysis often begins with descriptive inquiry and generation of a hypothesis, and the research questions cannot be clearly defined at the outset and may be unforeseeable over the long term. In this article, we consider how expanded data sharing poses new challenges, illustrated by genomics and the transition to new models of consent. We draw on the experiences of participants in an open data platform-the Personal Genome Project-to allow study participants to contribute their voices to inform ethical consent practices and protocol reviews for big-data research.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Unknown 91 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 14%
Researcher 11 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Other 16 17%
Unknown 18 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 9%
Computer Science 7 8%
Social Sciences 7 8%
Other 19 21%
Unknown 22 24%