Trust and The Acquisition and Use of Public Health Information.

IF 1.8 3区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS Health Care Analysis Pub Date : 2022-03-01 Epub Date: 2021-11-09 DOI:10.1007/s10728-021-00436-y
Stephen Holland, Jamie Cawthra, Tamara Schloemer, Peter Schröder-Bäck
{"title":"Trust and The Acquisition and Use of Public Health Information.","authors":"Stephen Holland,&nbsp;Jamie Cawthra,&nbsp;Tamara Schloemer,&nbsp;Peter Schröder-Bäck","doi":"10.1007/s10728-021-00436-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Information is clearly vital to public health, but the acquisition and use of public health data elicit serious privacy concerns. One strategy for navigating this dilemma is to build 'trust' in institutions responsible for health information, thereby reducing privacy concerns and increasing willingness to contribute personal data. This strategy, as currently presented in public health literature, has serious shortcomings. But it can be augmented by appealing to the philosophical analysis of the concept of trust. Philosophers distinguish trust and trustworthiness from cognate attitudes, such as confident reliance. Central to this is value congruence: trust is grounded in the perception of shared values. So, the way to build trust in institutions responsible for health data is for those institutions to develop and display values shared by the public. We defend this approach from objections, such as that trust is an interpersonal attitude inappropriate to the way people relate to organisations. The paper then moves on to the practical application of our strategy. Trust and trustworthiness can reduce privacy concerns and increase willingness to share health data, notably, in the context of internal and external threats to data privacy. We end by appealing for the sort of empirical work our proposal requires.</p>","PeriodicalId":46740,"journal":{"name":"Health Care Analysis","volume":"30 1","pages":"1-17"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8576798/pdf/","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Care Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-021-00436-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/11/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Information is clearly vital to public health, but the acquisition and use of public health data elicit serious privacy concerns. One strategy for navigating this dilemma is to build 'trust' in institutions responsible for health information, thereby reducing privacy concerns and increasing willingness to contribute personal data. This strategy, as currently presented in public health literature, has serious shortcomings. But it can be augmented by appealing to the philosophical analysis of the concept of trust. Philosophers distinguish trust and trustworthiness from cognate attitudes, such as confident reliance. Central to this is value congruence: trust is grounded in the perception of shared values. So, the way to build trust in institutions responsible for health data is for those institutions to develop and display values shared by the public. We defend this approach from objections, such as that trust is an interpersonal attitude inappropriate to the way people relate to organisations. The paper then moves on to the practical application of our strategy. Trust and trustworthiness can reduce privacy concerns and increase willingness to share health data, notably, in the context of internal and external threats to data privacy. We end by appealing for the sort of empirical work our proposal requires.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
信任与公共卫生信息的获取和使用。
信息显然对公共卫生至关重要,但公共卫生数据的获取和使用引发了严重的隐私问题。解决这一困境的一个策略是在负责卫生信息的机构中建立“信任”,从而减少隐私问题,增加提供个人数据的意愿。目前在公共卫生文献中提出的这一战略存在严重缺陷。但它可以通过诉诸对信任概念的哲学分析而得到增强。哲学家将信任和可信赖性与类似的态度(如自信的信赖)区分开来。这一点的核心是价值一致性:信任是建立在对共同价值观的认知基础上的。因此,建立对负责健康数据的机构的信任的方法是让这些机构发展和展示公众共享的价值观。我们为这种方法辩护,不受反对意见的影响,比如信任是一种人际关系态度,不适合人们与组织的关系。然后,本文转向我们的策略的实际应用。信任和可信赖性可以减少隐私问题,增加共享健康数据的意愿,特别是在数据隐私受到内部和外部威胁的情况下。最后,我们呼吁进行我们的建议所要求的那种经验性工作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
3
期刊介绍: Health Care Analysis is a journal that promotes dialogue and debate about conceptual and normative issues related to health and health care, including health systems, healthcare provision, health law, public policy and health, professional health practice, health services organization and decision-making, and health-related education at all levels of clinical medicine, public health and global health. Health Care Analysis seeks to support the conversation between philosophy and policy, in particular illustrating the importance of conceptual and normative analysis to health policy, practice and research. As such, papers accepted for publication are likely to analyse philosophical questions related to health, health care or health policy that focus on one or more of the following: aims or ends, theories, frameworks, concepts, principles, values or ideology. All styles of theoretical analysis are welcome providing that they illuminate conceptual or normative issues and encourage debate between those interested in health, philosophy and policy. Papers must be rigorous, but should strive for accessibility – with care being taken to ensure that their arguments and implications are plain to a broad academic and international audience. In addition to purely theoretical papers, papers grounded in empirical research or case-studies are very welcome so long as they explore the conceptual or normative implications of such work. Authors are encouraged, where possible, to have regard to the social contexts of the issues they are discussing, and all authors should ensure that they indicate the ‘real world’ implications of their work. Health Care Analysis publishes contributions from philosophers, lawyers, social scientists, healthcare educators, healthcare professionals and administrators, and other health-related academics and policy analysts.
期刊最新文献
Sustainability as an Intrinsic Moral Concern for Solidaristic Health Care. Recontextualization and Imagination: The Public Health Professional and the U.S. Health Care System. Childbirth as Fault Lines: Justifications in Physician-Patient Interactions About Postnatal Rehabilitation. Ethical, Psychological and Social Un/certainties in the Face of Deemed Consent for Organ Donation in England. "I Do Not Believe We Should Disclose Everything to an Older Patient": Challenges and Ethical Concerns in Clinical Decision-Making in Old-Age Care in Ethiopia.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1