探索医疗数据共享的障碍和伦理挑战:来自中国研究人员的观点。

IF 3 1区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS BMC Medical Ethics Pub Date : 2024-11-15 DOI:10.1186/s12910-024-01135-8
Xiaojie Li, Yali Cong
{"title":"探索医疗数据共享的障碍和伦理挑战:来自中国研究人员的观点。","authors":"Xiaojie Li, Yali Cong","doi":"10.1186/s12910-024-01135-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The impetus for policies promoting medical data sharing in China has gained significant traction. Nonetheless, the present legal and ethical framework governing the research use of medical data in China, is characterized by a more restrictive rather than permissive approach. The proportion of Chinese medical data being leveraged for scientific research still has room for improvement at present, indicating a significant untapped potential for advancing medical knowledge and improving healthcare outcomes. Building upon this research, we aim to delve deeper into the challenges researchers encounter in the sharing of medical data through focus group interviews.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted two focus group interviews study with researchers representing diverse disciplines to explore their perspectives on 21 June 2021 and 28 July 2021. A total of seventeen researchers willingly participated in this study, representing various professional backgrounds. Similar codes were merged. Research team discussions were also utilized to select interviewees' statements that were regarded as typical or representative.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The respondents demonstrated a strong understanding that medical data should not be disseminated arbitrarily, recognizing the importance of sharing data in compliance with laws. Through the interview, we found that although respondents stressed the importance of careful consideration regarding if and when this information can be responsibly released, none of the respondents raised the issue of necessitating consent from data subjects for the research use of medical data. This observation sharply contrasts with the stringent separate consent provisions for secondary data use outlined in the PIPL.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The findings from the focus group studies shed light on researchers' barriers and ethical challenges towards medical data sharing for scientific research, highlighting their deep concern for data security and cautious approach to sharing. The key objectives aimed at facilitating and enabling the reuse of medical data encompass enhancing interoperability, harmonizing data standards, improving data quality, safeguarding privacy, ensuring informed consent, incentivizing patients, and establishing explicit regulations pertaining to data access and utilization.</p>","PeriodicalId":55348,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Ethics","volume":"25 1","pages":"132"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11566659/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exploring barriers and ethical challenges to medical data sharing: perspectives from Chinese researchers.\",\"authors\":\"Xiaojie Li, Yali Cong\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12910-024-01135-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The impetus for policies promoting medical data sharing in China has gained significant traction. Nonetheless, the present legal and ethical framework governing the research use of medical data in China, is characterized by a more restrictive rather than permissive approach. The proportion of Chinese medical data being leveraged for scientific research still has room for improvement at present, indicating a significant untapped potential for advancing medical knowledge and improving healthcare outcomes. Building upon this research, we aim to delve deeper into the challenges researchers encounter in the sharing of medical data through focus group interviews.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted two focus group interviews study with researchers representing diverse disciplines to explore their perspectives on 21 June 2021 and 28 July 2021. A total of seventeen researchers willingly participated in this study, representing various professional backgrounds. Similar codes were merged. Research team discussions were also utilized to select interviewees' statements that were regarded as typical or representative.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The respondents demonstrated a strong understanding that medical data should not be disseminated arbitrarily, recognizing the importance of sharing data in compliance with laws. Through the interview, we found that although respondents stressed the importance of careful consideration regarding if and when this information can be responsibly released, none of the respondents raised the issue of necessitating consent from data subjects for the research use of medical data. This observation sharply contrasts with the stringent separate consent provisions for secondary data use outlined in the PIPL.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The findings from the focus group studies shed light on researchers' barriers and ethical challenges towards medical data sharing for scientific research, highlighting their deep concern for data security and cautious approach to sharing. The key objectives aimed at facilitating and enabling the reuse of medical data encompass enhancing interoperability, harmonizing data standards, improving data quality, safeguarding privacy, ensuring informed consent, incentivizing patients, and establishing explicit regulations pertaining to data access and utilization.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55348,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Medical Ethics\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"132\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11566659/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Medical Ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-024-01135-8\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-024-01135-8","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在中国,促进医疗数据共享的政策推动力已获得了巨大的牵引力。尽管如此,中国目前关于医疗数据研究使用的法律和伦理框架,其特点是限制多于放任。目前,中国医疗数据用于科学研究的比例仍有待提高,这表明中国在促进医学知识发展和改善医疗成果方面仍有巨大潜力有待挖掘。在此研究基础上,我们旨在通过焦点小组访谈深入探讨研究人员在共享医疗数据方面遇到的挑战:我们分别于 2021 年 6 月 21 日和 2021 年 7 月 28 日对不同学科的研究人员进行了两次焦点小组访谈,以探讨他们的观点。共有 17 名研究人员自愿参与了这项研究,他们代表了不同的专业背景。相似的代码进行了合并。研究小组还通过讨论选择了被认为具有典型性或代表性的受访者陈述:受访者对医疗数据不应随意传播有很强的理解,认识到依法共享数据的重要性。通过访谈,我们发现,虽然受访者强调必须慎重考虑是否以及何时可以负责任地发布这些信息,但没有一个受访者提出在研究中使用医疗数据必须征得数据对象同意的问题。这一观察结果与《私人信息保护法》中关于二次数据使用的严格的单独同意规定形成了鲜明对比:焦点小组的研究结果揭示了研究人员在科学研究中共享医疗数据所面临的障碍和伦理挑战,突出了他们对数据安全的深切关注和对共享数据的谨慎态度。旨在促进和推动医疗数据再利用的主要目标包括加强互操作性、统一数据标准、提高数据质量、保护隐私、确保知情同意、激励患者,以及制定有关数据访问和利用的明确法规。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Exploring barriers and ethical challenges to medical data sharing: perspectives from Chinese researchers.

Background: The impetus for policies promoting medical data sharing in China has gained significant traction. Nonetheless, the present legal and ethical framework governing the research use of medical data in China, is characterized by a more restrictive rather than permissive approach. The proportion of Chinese medical data being leveraged for scientific research still has room for improvement at present, indicating a significant untapped potential for advancing medical knowledge and improving healthcare outcomes. Building upon this research, we aim to delve deeper into the challenges researchers encounter in the sharing of medical data through focus group interviews.

Methods: We conducted two focus group interviews study with researchers representing diverse disciplines to explore their perspectives on 21 June 2021 and 28 July 2021. A total of seventeen researchers willingly participated in this study, representing various professional backgrounds. Similar codes were merged. Research team discussions were also utilized to select interviewees' statements that were regarded as typical or representative.

Results: The respondents demonstrated a strong understanding that medical data should not be disseminated arbitrarily, recognizing the importance of sharing data in compliance with laws. Through the interview, we found that although respondents stressed the importance of careful consideration regarding if and when this information can be responsibly released, none of the respondents raised the issue of necessitating consent from data subjects for the research use of medical data. This observation sharply contrasts with the stringent separate consent provisions for secondary data use outlined in the PIPL.

Conclusions: The findings from the focus group studies shed light on researchers' barriers and ethical challenges towards medical data sharing for scientific research, highlighting their deep concern for data security and cautious approach to sharing. The key objectives aimed at facilitating and enabling the reuse of medical data encompass enhancing interoperability, harmonizing data standards, improving data quality, safeguarding privacy, ensuring informed consent, incentivizing patients, and establishing explicit regulations pertaining to data access and utilization.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Medical Ethics
BMC Medical Ethics MEDICAL ETHICS-
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
7.40%
发文量
108
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Ethics is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in relation to the ethical aspects of biomedical research and clinical practice, including professional choices and conduct, medical technologies, healthcare systems and health policies.
期刊最新文献
A case study of Muslims' perspectives of expanded terminal sedation:addressing the elephant in the room. Ethical issues in vaccine trial participation by adolescents: qualitative insights on family decision making from a human papillomavirus vaccine trial in Tanzania. Scoping review and thematic analysis of informed consent in humanitarian emergencies. Healthcare workers' opinions on non-medical criteria for prioritisation of access to care during the pandemic. "I think all of us should have […] much better training in ethics." Ethical challenges in policy making during the COVID-19 pandemic: Results from an interview study with Swiss policy makers and scientists.
×
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