Checklist of fraud issues affecting e-health transactions

M F Tatelbaum

Abstract:This checklist is intended to serve as a starting point from which to untangle the web of laws and regulations affecting e-health transactions, focusing on fraud issues.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Fraud Track on Secure Electronic Check System

Ping Zhang,Yijun He,Kam-Pui Chow

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4018/ijdcf.2018040108

2018-01-01

International Journal of Digital Crime and Forensics

Abstract:The Electronic Check (eCheck) is designed to substitute paper checks to enhance the bank service with new ecommerce features in today's global economy, especially meeting the great upsurge of Internet and mobile banking services. The eCheck inherits all features of paper checks in an electronic format with some inherent advantages, as well as some new problems, which will be discussed in this article. Although the concept of eCheck has been put forward for more than two decades, the security of the eCheck system is still the key concern of the whole scheme, as well as the forensic trace of eCheck fraud. In this article, one implementation of a secure eCheck system is introduced which can defend most kinds of eCheck fraud and this article novelly analyzes how to trace back the fraud from a forensic perspective.
Healthcare fraud: a primer for the nurse executive

Rebecca F Cady

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.NHL.0000277202.16864.aa

Abstract:Healthcare fraud has become an issue about which all healthcare providers must be aware. Unfortunately, for most of us, the laws and the regulations developed to enforce the laws regarding fraud in healthcare are among the most confusing ever written. Healthcare fraud is an important area of risk for the nurse executive and an area about which all nurse executives need to be aware. Healthcare fraud primarily relates to improper billing of governmental healthcare programs. A basic understanding of these programs is therefore fundamental to understanding the problem of healthcare fraud and how to prevent it. This article will provide a basic overview of this subject for the nurse executive.
The Internet and electronic transmission of medical records

S G Campbell,G L Gibby,S Collingwood

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1007404806312

Abstract:Objective: To review, from a legal perspective the potential for using the Internet for inter-institutional transfer of patient medical records. Methods: Basic issues and recent legislation that relate to protection of both medical data, and those transferring that data over public network systems is reviewed. Results: Many laws already in existence can be applied to Internet transmission, but questions of jurisdiction remain. Providing signatures on requests for information, which are in essence contracts, is a problem. Signatures must both prove the identity of the participants and provide for non-repudiation of the agreement. Cryptographic digital signatures appear secure and effective, but their use is difficult to implement. Simpler methods are fraught with risks, yet are more easily accomplished. The patient's rights of privacy must be balanced against the need for access by government, physician, or healthcare institutions to confidential information. In general, information holders must put forth reasonable efforts to keep information confidential. The development of acknowledged standards will provide guidance. Multiple laws provide some deterrence and hence some reassurance to healthcare institutions, for example, by criminalizing acts of electronic interception of patient records in transit. Conclusion: Some believe the expense of secure transfer of medical records by electronic means is a major obstacle; this is false: such transfers are now technologically quite easy. The greatest obstacle to electronic transfer of medical records at this point is the development of workable standards for signing agreements and protecting transmissions, but the perceived advantages will likely drive the necessary developments.
Cyber threats to health information systems: A systematic review

Raul Luna,Emily Rhine,Matthew Myhra,Ross Sullivan,Clemens Scott Kruse

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3233/THC-151102

Abstract:Background: Recent legislation empowering providers to embrace the electronic exchange of health information leaves the healthcare industry increasingly vulnerable to cybercrime. The objective of this systematic review is to identify the biggest threats to healthcare via cybercrime. Objective: The rationale behind this systematic review is to provide a framework for future research by identifying themes and trends of cybercrime in the healthcare industry. Methods: The authors conducted a systematic search through the CINAHL, Academic Search Complete, PubMed, and ScienceDirect databases to gather literature relative to cyber threats in healthcare. All authors reviewed the articles collected and excluded literature that did not focus on the objective. Results: Researchers selected and examined 19 articles for common themes. The most prevalent cyber-criminal activity in healthcare is identity theft through data breach. Other concepts identified are internal threats, external threats, cyber-squatting, and cyberterrorism. Conclusions: The industry has now come to rely heavily on digital technologies, which increase risks such as denial of service and data breaches. Current healthcare cyber-security systems do not rival the capabilities of cyber criminals. Security of information is a costly resource and therefore many HCOs may hesitate to invest what is required to protect sensitive information.
Taking aim at medical identity theft. Document security key element to comply with government regulations

Colette Raymond

Abstract:Sensitive paper documents, such as patient records, customer data, and legal information, must be securely stored and destroyed when no longer needed. This is not only a good business practice that reduces costs and protects reputations, but also a legal and regulatory imperative. According to some experts, medical identity theft is the fastest-growing form of identity theft in North America. The Federal Trade Commission's Red Flags Rule, due to take effect June 1, 2010, requires banks; credit card companies; and, in some situations, retailers, hospitals, insurance companies, health clinics, and other organizations to store confidential personal information that can expose consumers to significant identity theft risks. This also includes healthcare providers and other organizations that are considered creditors according to their billing/payment procedures. This article highlights the steps healthcare providers must take to ensure data security.
Legal aspects of E-HEALTH

Stefaan Callens,Kim Cierkens

Abstract:Cross-border activities in health care in the European single market are increasing. Many of these cross-border developments are related to e-Health. E-Health describes the application of information and communication technologies across the whole range of functions that affect the health care sector. E-health attracts a growing interest on the European level that highlights the sharp need of appropriate regulatory framework able to ensure its promotion in the European Union. Some Directives constitute a step in this direction. Both the Data Protection Directive, the E-Commerce Directive, the Medical Device Directive and the Directive on Distance Contracting are some of the most important European legal achievements related to e-Health. Although the directives are not adopted especially for e-health applications, they are indirectly very important for e-Health. Firstly, the Data Protection Directive applies to personal data which form part of a filing system and contains several important principles that have to be complied with by e-Health actors processing personal data concerning health. Secondly, the E-commerce Directive applies to services provided at a distance by electronic means. Many e-Health applications fall within this scope. Thirdly, the Medical Devices Directive is of importance for the e-Health sector, especially with regard to e.g. the medical software that is used in many e-health applications. Finally, the Directive on Distance Contracting applies to contracts for goods or services which make use of one or more means of distance communication; E-Health business may involve the conclusion of contracts. Despite these Directives more developments are needed at the European level in order to make sure that e-Health will play an even more important role in health care systems than is the case today. The new e-Health applications like electronic health records, e-health platforms, health grids and the further use of genetic data and tissue involve new legal challenges. Several member states are introducing electronic health records or e-Health platforms. The use of electronic health records that contain data of several health actors poses new risks with some legal consequences. Recently, grids are being used in some ambitious medical and healthcare applications. In order to be truly effective such grid applications must draw together huge amounts of data from disparately located computers - which implies data sharing across jurisdictions and the sharing of responsibilities by a range of different data controllers. E-Health will also enhance the further use of human tissue and genetic data. More and clear guidelines on the reimbursement criteria for telemedicine and on liability would also be very useful. Guidance at the European level can be given as to the criteria that (tele-) health sessions will have to comply with for reimbursement purposes, since it is still unclear when e-Health sessions will be reimbursed. It is clear that the existing European legal framework is not finished yet and that more specific European rules are needed.
Challenges in ethics, safety, best practices, and oversight regarding HIT vendors, their customers, and patients: a report of an AMIA special task force

Kenneth W Goodman,Eta S Berner,Mark A Dente,Bonnie Kaplan,Ross Koppel,Donald Rucker,Daniel Z Sands,Peter Winkelstein,AMIA Board of Directors

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/jamia.2010.008946

Abstract:The current commercial health information technology (HIT) arena encompasses a number of competing firms that provide electronic health applications to hospitals, clinical practices, and other healthcare-related entities. Such applications collect, store, and analyze patient information. Some vendors incorporate contract language whereby purchasers of HIT systems, such as hospitals and clinics, must indemnify vendors for malpractice or personal injury claims, even if those events are not caused or fostered by the purchasers. Some vendors require contract clauses that force HIT system purchasers to adopt vendor-defined policies that prevent the disclosure of errors, bugs, design flaws, and other HIT-software-related hazards. To address this issue, the AMIA Board of Directors appointed a Task Force to provide an analysis and insights. Task Force findings and recommendations include: patient safety should trump all other values; corporate concerns about liability and intellectual property ownership may be valid but should not over-ride all other considerations; transparency and a commitment to patient safety should govern vendor contracts; institutions are duty-bound to provide ethics education to purchasers and users, and should commit publicly to standards of corporate conduct; and vendors, system purchasers, and users should encourage and assist in each others' efforts to adopt best practices. Finally, the HIT community should re-examine whether and how regulation of electronic health applications could foster improved care, public health, and patient safety.
CONSORT-EHEALTH: improving and standardizing evaluation reports of Web-based and mobile health interventions

Gunther Eysenbach,CONSORT-EHEALTH Group,David Moher,Lee Ritterband,Helen Christensen,Susan Stoner,Filip Drozd,Matthijs Blankers,Rik Crutzen,Robert Tait,David Mohr,Doug Evans,Robin Kok,Sorayouth Chumnanvej,Pongsak Kooprasertying,Stephen Anthony,Lucy Wanjuki Kivuti,Karen Hambly,J W M Aarts,Judith Prins,Isabel De la Torre,Royer Cook,Betty C Jung,Richard Burkhard,Armando Ruiz-Baques,Elia Gabarron,Alireza Ahmadvand,Stephen Gentles,Sylvia Kauer,Ólöf Birna Kristjánsdóttir,Rajneesh Choubisa,Emmanuel Kusi Achampong,Daniel Arvidsson,Marie-Pierre Gagnon,Mahmut Gurgan,Steven Daviss,Erin Mathieu,Michel Labrecque,Hansen Gottlieb Anders,Tuomas Lehto,Eleni Kaldoudi,Atle Klovning,Ming-Yuan Chih,Konstantinos Antypas,Hilde Eide,Terry Lewin,Fung Lin Elean Leung,Jessica Ancker,Juanita Fernando,Patrick M Archambault,Rodrigo Dias,Annie Lau,Peter Beck,Evan Mayo-Wilson,Brigitte Bewick

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.1923

2011-12-31

Abstract:Background: Web-based and mobile health interventions (also called "Internet interventions" or "ehealth/mhealth interventions") are tools or treatments, typically behaviorally based, that are operationalized and transformed for delivery via the Internet or mobile platforms. These include electronic tools for patients, informal caregivers, healthy consumers, and health care providers. The "Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials" (CONSORT) was developed to improve the suboptimal reporting of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). While broadly the CONSORT statement can be applied to provide guidance on how ehealth and mhealth trials should be reported, RCTs of web-based interventions pose very specific issues and challenges, in particular related to reporting sufficient details of the intervention to allow replication and theory-building. Objective: To develop a checklist, dubbed CONSORT-EHEALTH (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials of Electronic and Mobile HEalth Applications and onLine TeleHealth), as an extension of the CONSORT statement that provides guidance for authors of ehealth and mhealth interventions. Methods: A literature review was conducted, followed by a survey among ehealth experts and a workshop. Results: An instrument and checklist was constructed as an extension of the CONSORT statement. The instrument has been adopted by the Journal of Medical Internet Research (JMIR) and authors of ehealth RCTs are required to submit an electronic checklist explaining how they addressed each subitem. Conclusions: CONSORT-EHEALTH has the potential to improve reporting and provides a basis for evaluating the validity and applicability of ehealth trials. Subitems describing how the intervention should be reported can also be used for non-RCT evaluation reports. As part of the development process, an evaluation component is essential, therefore feedback from authors will be solicited, and a before-after study will evaluate whether reporting has been improved.
Electronic healthcare: issues and challenges.

Sushil K. Sharma,Huinan Xu,Nilmini Wickramasinghe,Nazim Ahmed

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEH.2006.008693

2006-01-01

Abstract:The shift in the nation's attention, resources and interest toward internet-related healthcare activities, often called 'e-health', is dramatic and a most significant development in the healthcare environment. E-health, while exciting and promising, also presents new challenges, particularly in regard to acceptable standards, choice of technologies, overcoming traditional jurisdictional boundaries, up-front investment and privacy and confidentiality. This paper presents e-health architecture and various issues and challenges that need to be resolved before e-health becomes commonplace.
Development of the mHealth App Trustworthiness checklist

Afua van Haasteren,Felix Gille,Marta Fadda,Effy Vayena

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2055207619886463

2019-01-01

Digital Health

Abstract:Background Mobile health applications (mHealth apps) currently lack a consensus on substantial quality and safety standards. As such, the number of individuals engaging with untrustworthy mHealth apps continues to grow at a steady pace. Objective The purpose of this study was to investigate end-users’ opinions on the features or actions necessary for trustworthy mHealth apps; and to convey this information to app developers via a succinct but informative checklist: the mHealth app trustworthiness checklist. Methods The checklist was formulated in three stages: (a) a literature review of studies identified the desirable features of the most prolific mHealth apps (health and fitness apps); (b) four focus group sessions with past or current users of these apps ( n = 20); and (c) expert feedback on whether the checklist items are conceivable in a real-life setting ( n = 6). Results Five major themes emerged from the focus group discussions: informational content, organizational attributes, societal influence, technology-related features, and user control factors. The mHealth app trustworthiness checklist was developed to incorporate these five themes and subsequently modified following expert consultation. In addition to the trustworthiness themes, we identified features that lie between trust and mistrust (limited digital literacy and indifference) as well as 10 features and actions that cause end-users to mistrust mHealth apps. Conclusion This study contributes to the evidence base on the attributes of trustworthy mHealth apps. The mHealth app trustworthiness checklist is a useful tool in advancing continued efforts to ensure that health technologies are trustworthy.

public, environmental & occupational health,health care sciences & services,medical informatics,health policy & services
Fraud in Genetic Testing: Swindling the System

Rachel Notestine,Claire N Singletary,Meagan Choates,Stephanie Gandomi,Molly Daniels,Rebecca Lunstroth,Quinn Stein

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gim.2024.101248

2024-09-03

Abstract:Purpose: Healthcare fraud comprises a sizable portion of United States healthcare expenditure and inflicts undue burden on payors, patients, and the healthcare system overall. The genetic testing industry is rapidly growing which propagates opportunities for healthcare fraud. Although federal organizations have highlighted it as an issue, there is limited research exploring genetic testing fraud. Methods: A retrospective review of federal websites, news articles, and a legal database resulted in 42 cases of fraud involving outpatient genetic testing published between February 2019 and December 2023. These cases were analyzed for themes via inductive conventional content analysis. Results: Themes of fraudulent activity included submission of fraudulent claims, kickback or bribe payments, minimal or no contact with patients for which testing was ordered, inappropriate billing and documentation practices, and further actions to conceal fraud. Repercussions imposed on defendants included monetary penalty, imprisonment, business restrictions, and seizure of property. Conclusion: High rates of medically inappropriate testing in fraud cases highlight the value of genetics experts in ordering or reviewing claims for genetic testing. Examining fraudulent activity in genetic testing can help providers identify and report fraud, and provide awareness of optimal healthcare allocation in the genetic testing industry.
Combating Health Care Fraud and Abuse: Conceptualization and Prototyping Study of a Blockchain Antifraud Framework

Tim Ken Mackey,Ken Miyachi,Danny Fung,Samson Qian,James Short

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/18623

2020-09-10

Abstract:Background: An estimated US $2.6 billion loss is attributed to health care fraud and abuse. With traditional health care claims verification and reimbursement, the health care provider submits a claim after rendering services to a patient, which is then verified and reimbursed by the payer. However, this process leaves out a critical stakeholder: the patient for whom the services are actually rendered. This lack of patient participation introduces a risk of fraud and abuse. Blockchain technology enables secure data management with transparency, which could mitigate this risk of health care fraud and abuse. Objective: The aim of this study is to develop a framework using blockchain to record claims data and transactions in an immutable format and to enable the patient to act as a validating node to help detect and prevent health care fraud and abuse. Methods: We developed a health care fraud and abuse blockchain technical framework and prototype using key blockchain tools and application layers including consensus algorithms, smart contracts, tokens, and governance based on digital identity on the Ethereum platform (Ethereum Foundation). Results: Our technical framework maps to the claims adjudication process and focuses on Medicare claims, with the US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) as the central authority. A prototype of the framework system was developed using the blockchain platform Ethereum (Ethereum Foundation), with its design features, workflow, smart contract functions, system architecture, and software implementation outlined. The software stack used to build the system consisted of a front-end user interface framework, a back-end processing server, and a blockchain network. React was used for the user interface framework, and NodeJS and an Express server were used for the back-end processing server; Solidity was the smart contract language used to interact with a local Ethereum blockchain network. Conclusions: The proposed framework and the initial prototype have the potential to improve the health care claims process by using blockchain technology for secure data storage and consensus mechanisms, which make the claims adjudication process more patient-centric for the purposes of identifying and preventing health care fraud and abuse. Future work will focus on the use of synthetic or historic CMS claims data to assess the real-world viability of the framework.
Impact of fraudulent claims on health care costs

S Kelly

Abstract:The U.S. health care system, considered one of the best in the world for technological sophistication and availability of services, is being seriously threatened by continually escalating costs. Although there are many reasons for this, fraud within the industry accounts for 10 percent of the nation's annual health care bill. By the end of the decade, the fraud factor may cost the industry $160 billion a year. Health insurers and state and government agencies are joining forces to share information and intensify their efforts in the battle against fraud. MetLife's in-house efforts include a specialized unit devoted entirely to the prevention, detection and prosecution of fraud. In 1990 the company's vigilance saved its policyholders over $38 million.
Balance Billing by Health Care Providers: Assessing Consumer Protections Across States

Kevin Lucia,Jack Hoadley,Ashley Williams

Abstract:ISSUE: Privately insured consumers expect that if they pay premiums and use in-network providers, their insurer will cover the cost of medically necessary care beyond their cost-sharing. However, when obtaining care at emergency departments and in-network hospitals, patients treated by an out-of-network provider may receive an unexpected "balance bill" for an amount beyond what the insurer paid. With no explicit federal protections against balance billing, some states have stepped in to protect consumers from this costly and confusing practice. GOAL: To better understand the scope of state laws to protect consumers from balance billing. METHODS: Analysis of laws in all 50 states and the District of Columbia and interviews with officials in eight states. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: Most states do not have laws that directly protect consumers from balance billing by an out-of-network provider for care delivered in an emergency department or in-network hospital. Of the 21 states offering protections, only six have a comprehensive approach to safeguarding consumers in both settings, and gaps remain even in these states. Because a federal policy solution might prove difficult, states may be better positioned in the short term to protect consumers.
Fourteen years of manifestations and factors of health insurance fraud, 2006-2020: a scoping review

José Villegas-Ortega,Luciana Bellido-Boza,David Mauricio

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40352-021-00149-3

2021-09-30

Abstract:Background: Healthcare fraud entails great financial and human losses; however, there is no consensus regarding its definition, nor is there an inventory of its manifestations and factors. The objective is to identify the definition, manifestations and factors that influence health insurance fraud (HIF). Methods: A scoping review on health insurance fraud published between 2006 and 2020 was conducted in ACM, EconPapers, PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Springer and WoS. Results: Sixty-seven studies were included, from which we identified 6 definitions, 22 manifestations (13 by the medical provider, 7 by the beneficiary and, 2 by the insurance company) and 47 factors (6 macroenvironmental, 15 mesoenvironmental, 20 microenvironmental, and 6 combined) associated with health insurance fraud. We recognized the elements of fraud and its dependence on the legal framework and health coverage. From this analysis, we propose the following definition: "Health insurance fraud is an act of deception or intentional misrepresentation to obtain illegal benefits concerning the coverage provided by a health insurance company". Among the most relevant manifestations perpetuated by the provider are phantom billing, falsification of documents, and overutilization of services; the subscribers are identity fraud, misrepresentation of coverage and alteration of documents; and those perpetrated by the insurance company are false declarations of benefits and falsification of reimbursements. Of the 47 factors, 25 showed an experimental influence, including three in the macroenvironment: culture, regulations, and geography; five in the mesoenvironment: characteristics of provider, management policy, reputation, professional role and auditing; 12 in the microenvironment: sex, race, condition of insurance, language, treatments, chronic disease, future risk of disease, medications, morale, inequity, coinsurance, and the decisions of the claims-adjusters; and five combined factors: the relationships between beneficiary-provider, provider-insurance company, beneficiary-insurance company, managers and guānxi. Conclusions: The multifactorial nature of HIF and the characteristics of its manifestations depend on its definition; Identifying the influence of the factors will support subsequent attempts to combat HIF.
How are financial institutions enabling online fraud? A developmental online financial fraud policy review

Tessa Cole

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/jfc-10-2022-0261

2023-01-14

Journal of Financial Crime

Abstract:Purpose The criminalization of online financial fraud is examined by analyzing the existing literature, policies and state statutes within the context of the cybercrime ecosystem. Therefore, this paper aims to investigate online fraud policies within the USA and the prevalence of such incidents to explore the effectiveness of current fraud policies. Design/methodology/approach This examination explores policies related to online fraud within the USA by defining online financial fraud incidents within the context of the cybercrime ecosystem and analyzing such incidents with routine activities theory to emphasize the current legislative inadequacies with provisional policy recommendations. Findings This research suggests online financial fraud is not unanimously conceptualized among regulating or criminal institutions. Although federal regulators have governed financial institutions, federal institutions have failed to account for the capabilities of computer-mediated and technological device use (12 USC §1829). Research limitations/implications The limited research analyzing the effectiveness of guardianship that prevents or deters internet-mitigated or dependent financial fraud crimes. Practical implications Policy recommendations include but are not limited to mandating federal and privatized financial institutions to disclose all fraudulent activity to all stakeholders (e.g. customers and local and federal criminal justice agencies). Originality/value This paper provides an innovative approach using a criminological theory and policy framework to examine the prevalence of online fraud and the regulations enacted to counteract such violations.
Technical guidelines for enhancing privacy and data protection in modern electronic medical environments

Stefanos Gritzalis,Costas Lambrinoudakis,Dimitrios Lekkas,Spyros Deftereos

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/titb.2005.847498

Abstract:Raising awareness and providing guidance to on-line data protection is undoubtedly a crucial issue worldwide. Equally important is the issue of applying privacy-related legislation in a coherent and coordinated way. Both these topics gain extra attention when referring to medical environments and, thus, to the protection of patients' privacy and medical data. Electronic medical transactions require the transmission of personal and medical information over insecure communication channels like the Internet. It is, therefore, a rather straightforward task to capture the electronic medical behavior of a patient, thus constructing "patient profiles," or reveal sensitive information related to a patient's medical history. The consequence is clearly a potential violation of the patient's privacy. We performed a risk analysis study for a Greek shared care environment for the treatment of patients suffering from beta-thalassemia, an empirically embedded scenario that is representative of many other electronic medical environments; we capitalized on its results to provide an assessment of the associated risks, focusing on the description of countermeasures, in the form of technical guidelines that can be employed in such medical environments for protecting the privacy of personal and medical information.
An Ethics Checklist for Digital Health Research in Psychiatry: Viewpoint

Francis X Shen,Benjamin C Silverman,Patrick Monette,Sara Kimble,Scott L Rauch,Justin T Baker

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/31146

2022-02-09

Abstract:Background: Psychiatry has long needed a better and more scalable way to capture the dynamics of behavior and its disturbances, quantitatively across multiple data channels, at high temporal resolution in real time. By combining 24/7 data-on location, movement, email and text communications, and social media-with brain scans, genetics, genomics, neuropsychological batteries, and clinical interviews, researchers will have an unprecedented amount of objective, individual-level data. Analyzing these data with ever-evolving artificial intelligence could one day include bringing interventions to patients where they are in the real world in a convenient, efficient, effective, and timely way. Yet, the road to this innovative future is fraught with ethical dilemmas as well as ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI). Objective: The goal of the Ethics Checklist is to promote careful design and execution of research. It is not meant to mandate particular research designs; indeed, at this early stage and without consensus guidance, there are a range of reasonable choices researchers may make. However, the checklist is meant to make those ethical choices explicit, and to require researchers to give reasons for their decisions related to ELSI issues. The Ethics Checklist is primarily focused on procedural safeguards, such as consulting with experts outside the research group and documenting standard operating procedures for clearly actionable data (eg, expressed suicidality) within written research protocols. Methods: We explored the ELSI of digital health research in psychiatry, with a particular focus on what we label "deep phenotyping" psychiatric research, which combines the potential for virtually boundless data collection and increasingly sophisticated techniques to analyze those data. We convened an interdisciplinary expert stakeholder workshop in May 2020, and this checklist emerges out of that dialogue. Results: Consistent with recent ELSI analyses, we find that existing ethical guidance and legal regulations are not sufficient for deep phenotyping research in psychiatry. At present, there are regulatory gaps, inconsistencies across research teams in ethics protocols, and a lack of consensus among institutional review boards on when and how deep phenotyping research should proceed. We thus developed a new instrument, an Ethics Checklist for Digital Health Research in Psychiatry ("the Ethics Checklist"). The Ethics Checklist is composed of 20 key questions, subdivided into 6 interrelated domains: (1) informed consent; (2) equity, diversity, and access; (3) privacy and partnerships; (4) regulation and law; (5) return of results; and (6) duty to warn and duty to report. Conclusions: Deep phenotyping research offers a vision for vastly more effective care for people with, or at risk for, psychiatric disease. The potential perils en route to realizing this vision are significant; however, and researchers must be willing to address the questions in the Ethics Checklist before embarking on each leg of the journey.
Cyber-Security Issues in Healthcare Information Technology

Steve G Langer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-016-9913-x

Abstract:In 1999-2003, SIIM (then SCAR) sponsored the creation of several special topic Primers, one of which was concerned with computer security. About the same time, a multi-society collaboration authored an ACR Guideline with a similar plot; the latter has recently been updated. The motivation for these efforts was the launch of Health Information Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). That legislation directed care providers to enable the portability of patient medical records across authorized medical centers, while simultaneously protecting patient confidentiality among unauthorized agents. These policy requirements resulted in the creation of numerous technical solutions which the above documents described. While the mathematical concepts and algorithms in those papers are as valid today as they were then, recent increases in the complexity of computer criminal applications (and defensive countermeasures) and the pervasiveness of Internet connected devices have raised the bar. This work examines how a medical center can adapt to these evolving threats.
Terms and conditions apply: an ethical analysis of mobile health user agreements in research

Luke Gelinas,Walker Morrell,Barbara E Bierer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsad021

2023-07-14

Abstract:Mobile health (mHealth) technologies raise unique risks to user privacy and confidentiality that are often embedded in lengthy and complex Privacy Policies, Terms of Use, and End User License Agreements. We seek to improve the ethical review of these documents ('user agreements') and their risks in research using mHealth technologies by providing a framework for identifying when these risks are research risks, categorizing the key information in these agreements under relevant ethical and regulatory categories, and proposing strategies to mitigate them. MHealth user agreements typically describe the nature of the data collected by mHealth technologies, why or for what purposes user data are collected and shared, who will have access to the different types of data collected, and may include exculpatory language. The risks raised by data collection and sharing typically increase with the sensitivity and identifiability of the data and vary by whether data are shared with researchers, the technology developer, and/or third-party entities. The most important risk mitigation strategy is disclosure of the key information found in user agreements to participants during the research consent process. In addition, researchers should prioritize mHealth technologies with favorable risk-benefit balances.

Checklist of fraud issues affecting e-health transactions

Fraud Track on Secure Electronic Check System

Healthcare fraud: a primer for the nurse executive

The Internet and electronic transmission of medical records

Cyber threats to health information systems: A systematic review

Taking aim at medical identity theft. Document security key element to comply with government regulations

Legal aspects of E-HEALTH

Challenges in ethics, safety, best practices, and oversight regarding HIT vendors, their customers, and patients: a report of an AMIA special task force

CONSORT-EHEALTH: improving and standardizing evaluation reports of Web-based and mobile health interventions

Electronic healthcare: issues and challenges.

Development of the mHealth App Trustworthiness checklist

Fraud in Genetic Testing: Swindling the System

Combating Health Care Fraud and Abuse: Conceptualization and Prototyping Study of a Blockchain Antifraud Framework

Impact of fraudulent claims on health care costs

Balance Billing by Health Care Providers: Assessing Consumer Protections Across States

Fourteen years of manifestations and factors of health insurance fraud, 2006-2020: a scoping review

How are financial institutions enabling online fraud? A developmental online financial fraud policy review

Technical guidelines for enhancing privacy and data protection in modern electronic medical environments

An Ethics Checklist for Digital Health Research in Psychiatry: Viewpoint

Cyber-Security Issues in Healthcare Information Technology

Terms and conditions apply: an ethical analysis of mobile health user agreements in research