Cautionary Note on Data Sharing

Daniel B. Kramer,Brahmajee K. Nallamothu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/circoutcomes.124.010257

2024-09-19

Circulation Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes

Abstract:Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes, Volume 17, Issue 9, Page e010257, September 1, 2024.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Evaluation of Data Sharing After Implementation of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors Data Sharing Statement Requirement

Valentin Danchev,Yan Min,John Borghi,Mike Baiocchi,John P. A. Ioannidis

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.33972

2021-01-28

JAMA Network Open

Abstract:Importance: The benefits of responsible sharing of individual-participant data (IPD) from clinical studies are well recognized, but stakeholders often disagree on how to align those benefits with privacy risks, costs, and incentives for clinical trialists and sponsors. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) required a data sharing statement (DSS) from submissions reporting clinical trials effective July 1, 2018. The required DSSs provide a window into current data sharing rates, practices, and norms among trialists and sponsors.Objective: To evaluate the implementation of the ICMJE DSS requirement in 3 leading medical journals: JAMA, Lancet, and New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM).Design, Setting, and Participants: This is a cross-sectional study of clinical trial reports published as articles in JAMA, Lancet, and NEJM between July 1, 2018, and April 4, 2020. Articles not eligible for DSS, including observational studies and letters or correspondence, were excluded. A MEDLINE/PubMed search identified 487 eligible clinical trials in JAMA (112 trials), Lancet (147 trials), and NEJM (228 trials). Two reviewers evaluated each of the 487 articles independently.Exposure: Publication of clinical trial reports in an ICMJE medical journal requiring a DSS.Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes of the study were declared data availability and actual data availability in repositories. Other captured outcomes were data type, access, and conditions and reasons for data availability or unavailability. Associations with funding sources were examined.Results: A total of 334 of 487 articles (68.6%; 95% CI, 64%-73%) declared data sharing, with nonindustry NIH-funded trials exhibiting the highest rates of declared data sharing (89%; 95% CI, 80%-98%) and industry-funded trials the lowest (61%; 95% CI, 54%-68%). However, only 2 IPD sets (0.6%; 95% CI, 0.0%-1.5%) were actually deidentified and publicly available as of April 10, 2020. The remaining were supposedly accessible via request to authors (143 of 334 articles [42.8%]), repository (89 of 334 articles [26.6%]), and company (78 of 334 articles [23.4%]). Among the 89 articles declaring that IPD would be stored in repositories, only 17 (19.1%) deposited data, mostly because of embargo and regulatory approval. Embargo was set in 47.3% of data-sharing articles (158 of 334), and in half of them the period exceeded 1 year or was unspecified.Conclusions and Relevance: Most trials published in JAMA, Lancet, and NEJM after the implementation of the ICMJE policy declared their intent to make clinical data available. However, a wide gap between declared and actual data sharing exists. To improve transparency and data reuse, journals should promote the use of unique pointers to data set location and standardized choices for embargo periods and access requirements.

medicine, general & internal
Coronary Plaque Sampling Reveals Molecular Insights Into Coronary Artery Disease

Michael E. Widlansky,Yong Liu,Shakirah Tumusiime,Benjamin Hofeld,Nabeel Khan,Michael Aljadah,Jingli Wang,Amberly Anger,Qiongzi Qiu,Bhavika Therani,Pengyuan Liu,Mingyu Liang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.123.323022

IF: 23.213

2023-01-01

Circulation Research

Abstract:HomeCirculation ResearchAhead of PrintCoronary Plaque Sampling Reveals Molecular Insights Into Coronary Artery Disease Open AccessResearch ArticlePDF/EPUBAboutView PDFSections ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload citationsTrack citationsPermissions ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InMendeleyReddit Jump toOpen AccessResearch ArticlePDF/EPUBCoronary Plaque Sampling Reveals Molecular Insights Into Coronary Artery Disease Michael E. Widlansky, Yong Liu, Shakirah Tumusiime, Benjamin Hofeld, Nabeel Khan, Michael Aljadah, Jingli Wang, Amberly Anger, Qiongzi Qiu, Bhavika Therani, Pengyuan Liu and Mingyu Liang Michael E. WidlanskyMichael E. Widlansky Correspondence to: Michael E. Widlansky, MD, MPH, Email E-mail Address: [email protected] https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1461-9707 Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee. (M.E.W., B.H., N.K., M.A., J.W., A.A.) *M.E. Widlansky, Y. Liu, and S. Tumusiime contributed equally as co-first authors. Search for more papers by this author , Yong LiuYong Liu https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8489-1741 Center of Systems Molecular Medicine, Department of Physiology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee. (Y.L., S.T., Q.Q., B.T., P.L., M.L.) Department of Physiology, University of Arizona College of Medicine – Tucson (Y.L., Q.Q., B.T., P.L., M.L.). *M.E. Widlansky, Y. Liu, and S. Tumusiime contributed equally as co-first authors. Search for more papers by this author , Shakirah TumusiimeShakirah Tumusiime Center of Systems Molecular Medicine, Department of Physiology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee. (Y.L., S.T., Q.Q., B.T., P.L., M.L.) *M.E. Widlansky, Y. Liu, and S. Tumusiime contributed equally as co-first authors. Search for more papers by this author , Benjamin HofeldBenjamin Hofeld https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9873-7259 Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee. (M.E.W., B.H., N.K., M.A., J.W., A.A.) Search for more papers by this author , Nabeel KhanNabeel Khan https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5247-2358 Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee. (M.E.W., B.H., N.K., M.A., J.W., A.A.) Search for more papers by this author , Michael AljadahMichael Aljadah https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1858-2670 Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee. (M.E.W., B.H., N.K., M.A., J.W., A.A.) Search for more papers by this author , Jingli WangJingli Wang Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee. (M.E.W., B.H., N.K., M.A., J.W., A.A.) Search for more papers by this author , Amberly AngerAmberly Anger Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee. (M.E.W., B.H., N.K., M.A., J.W., A.A.) Search for more papers by this author , Qiongzi QiuQiongzi Qiu https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6486-6394 Center of Systems Molecular Medicine, Department of Physiology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee. (Y.L., S.T., Q.Q., B.T., P.L., M.L.) Department of Physiology, University of Arizona College of Medicine – Tucson (Y.L., Q.Q., B.T., P.L., M.L.). Search for more papers by this author , Bhavika TheraniBhavika Therani https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0560-5362 Center of Systems Molecular Medicine, Department of Physiology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee. (Y.L., S.T., Q.Q., B.T., P.L., M.L.) Department of Physiology, University of Arizona College of Medicine – Tucson (Y.L., Q.Q., B.T., P.L., M.L.). Search for more papers by this author , Pengyuan LiuPengyuan Liu Center of Systems Molecular Medicine, Department of Physiology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee. (Y.L., S.T., Q.Q., B.T., P.L., M.L.) Department of Physiology, University of Arizona College of Medicine – Tucson (Y.L., Q.Q., B.T., P.L., M.L.). Department of Respiratory Medicine, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital and Institute of Translational Medicine, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China (P.L.). Cancer center, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China (P.L.). Search for more papers by this author and Mingyu LiangMingyu Liang Mingyu Liang, MB, PhD, Email E-mail Address: [email protected] https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6970-989X Center of Systems Molecular Medicine, Department of Physiology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee. (Y.L., S.T., Q.Q., B.T., P.L., M.L.) Department of Physiology, University of Arizona College of Medicine – Tucson (Y.L., Q.Q., B.T., P.L., M.L.). Search for more papers by this author Originally published4 Aug 2023https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.123.323022Circulation Research. 2023;0FootnotesFor Sources of Funding and Disclosures, see page XXX.*M.E. Widlansky, Y. Liu, and S. Tumusiime contributed equally as co-first authors.Correspondence to: Michael E. Widlansky, MD, MPH, Email [email protected].eduMingyu Liang, MB, PhD, Email [email protected].edu eLetters(0)eLetters should relate to an article recently published in the journal and are not a forum for providing unpublished data. Comments are reviewed for appropriate use of tone and language. Comments are not peer-reviewed. Acceptable comments are posted to the journal website only. Comments are not published in an issue and are not indexed in PubMed. Comments should be no longer than 500 words and will only be posted online. References are limited to 10. Authors of the article cited in the comment will be invited to reply, as appropriate.Comments and feedback on AHA/ASA Scientific Statements and Guidelines should be directed to the AHA/ASA Manuscript Oversight Committee via its Correspondence page.Sign In to Submit a Response to This Article Previous Back to top Next FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Advertisement Article InformationMetrics © 2023 The Authors. Circulation Research is published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original work is properly cited, the use is noncommercial, and no modifications or adaptations are made.https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.123.323022PMID: 37539553 Originally publishedAugust 4, 2023 Keywordsgene expressiondemographyatherosclerosismyocardial infarctioncoronary artery diseasePDF download Advertisement SubjectsGene Expression and RegulationOmicsPrecision Medicine
Future of Patient-Reported Outcomes: Bringing Patients' Voices Into Health Care

John A. Spertus,Alexander T. Singh,Suzanne V. Arnold

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/circoutcomes.124.010008

2024-09-19

Circulation Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes

Abstract:Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes, Volume 17, Issue 9, Page e010008, September 1, 2024.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems
Questionable practices in data and code sharing policy in high-profile medical journal and research

Wei Li,Xuerong Liu,Qianyu Zhang,Liping Shi,Jing-Xuan Zhang,Xiaolin Zhang,Jia Luan,Yue Li,Ting Xu,Rong Zhang,Xiaodi Han,Jingyu Lei,Xueqian Wang,Yaozhi Wang,Hai Lan,Xiaohan Chen,Yi Wu,Yan Wu,Lei Xia,Haiping Liao,Chang Shen,Yang Yu,Xinyu Xu,Chao Deng,Pei Liu,Zhengzhi Feng,Chunji Huang,Zhiyi Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.08.29.24312818

2024-08-30

Abstract:Background The spurious and unavailable data/code sharing actions are crashing open medical sciences. In this study, we aimed to illustrate how high-profile medical journals are practically carried out their sharing policies and what questionable practices regarding data/code sharing are conducted by authors. Methods In this study, we appraised the policy on data/code availability of high-profile medical journals ranked at Q1 according to Clarivate Journal Citation Report (JCR 2021). Furthermore, we recruited post-publications published by four leading medical journals (i.e., The BMJ, JAMA, NEJM and The Lancet) from the issuing of data/code availability policy to December 2022 for the questionable practices in data/code sharing. The appraisal of papers was conducted by the Data/code Availability Statement Practice Evaluation Tool (DANCE), developed by systematically integrating mainstreaming open data/code guidelines. Findings We found that less than one-tenth journals (9.1%) mandated authors to share data/code, with an available statement. Among these journals, 70.6% (61.2%) did not consider censoring (restricting) spurious/invalid data/code sharing in publications. Furthermore, though journal impact factor could predict policy stringency on "offering availability statements"(p < .001), it failed to predict ones in "sharing data/code"(p = .73). For publications, even in leading medical journals (i.e., The BMJ, JAMA, NEJM and The Lancet), only 0.5% of the papers (16/3,191) fully complied with their public sharing statements for reaching reproducibility. Lack of availability statement, declining data/code sharing without reasons, and invalid repositories were leading questionable practices conducted by authors. Interpretation We clarified specific questionable actions of implementing and practicing the sharing policy both in journal and papers, which should be addressed not only by the supportive publication ecosystem but also by crediting authors for taking responsibility and maintaining scientific integrity in data/code sharing. Funding No funding.
Fresh takes on five health data sharing domains: Quality, privacy, equity, incentives, and sustainability

Christi J Guerrini,Mary A Majumder,Jill O Robinson,Robert Cook-Deegan,Matthew Blank,Juli Bollinger,Janis Geary,Amanda M Gutierrez,Maya Shrikant,Amy L McGuire

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fdata.2023.1095119

2023-02-06

Abstract:As entities around the world invest in repositories and other infrastructure to facilitate health data sharing, scalable solutions to data sharing challenges are needed. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 24 experts to explore views on potential issues and policy options related to health data sharing. In this Perspective, we describe and contextualize unconventional insights shared by our interviewees relevant to issues in five domains: data quality, privacy, equity, incentives, and sustainability. These insights question a focus on granular quality metrics for gatekeeping; challenge enthusiasm for maximalist risk disclosure practices; call attention to power dynamics that potentially compromise the patient's voice; encourage faith in the sharing proclivities of new generations of scientists; and endorse accounting for personal disposition in the selection of long-term partners. We consider the merits of each insight with the broad goal of encouraging creative thinking to address data sharing challenges.
The National Cardiovascular Data Registry Data Quality Program 2020: JACC State-of-the-Art Review

David J Malenka,Deepak L Bhatt,Steven M Bradley,David M Shahian,Jasmine Draoui,Claire A Segawa,Christina Koutras,Jinnette D Abbott,James C Blankenship,Robert Vincent,John Windle,Thomas T Tsai,Jeptha Curtis,Matthew Roe,Frederick A Masoudi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2022.02.034

2022-05-03

Abstract:The National Cardiovascular Data Registry is a group of registries maintained by the American College of Cardiology Foundation. These registries are used by a diverse constituency to improve the quality and outcomes of cardiovascular care, to assess the safety and effectiveness of new therapies, and for research. To achieve these goals, registry data must be complete and reliable. In this article, we review the process of National Cardiovascular Data Registry data collection, assess data completeness and integrity, and report on the current state of the data. Registry data are complete. Accuracy is very good but variable, and there is room for improvement. Knowledge of the quality of data is essential to ensuring its appropriate use.
The 21st Century Cures Act: Inpatient Clinician Perceptions of Changes to Information Sharing at an Academic Medical Center

Mohamad K. Hamze,Shubhankar S. Joshi,Yao Li,Allen B. Repp,Alicia Jacobs,Rachel McEntee,Allen B. Repp,Mohamad K Hamze,Shubhankar S Joshi,Allen B Repp

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.40184

2023-06-09

Cureus

Abstract:Introduction To comply with the Information Blocking Rule in the 21st Century Cures Act, many hospitals began to release inpatient electronic health information such as clinical notes and results to patients immediately, starting in April 2021. We sought to understand the perceptions of hospital-based clinicians regarding the impact of these changes in information sharing on clinicians and patients. Materials and methods We developed and distributed an electronic survey to 122 inpatient attending physicians, resident physicians, and physician assistants within the internal medicine and family medicine departments at an academic medical center. The survey asked clinicians to rate their comfort with information-sharing protocols and describe their perceptions of the impact of immediate information sharing on their documentation habits and patient interactions following the implementation of the Cures Act. Results The survey response rate was 37.7% (46/122). Of the respondents, 56.5% felt comfortable with the note-sharing process, 84.8% reported omitting specific information from their notes to prevent patients from reading it, and 39.1% of clinicians agreed that patients have found clinical notes "more confusing than helpful." Conclusions Immediate sharing of electronic health information has the potential to be a powerful tool for communicating with hospitalized patients. However, our results show many hospital-based clinicians report limited comfort with the note-sharing process and perceive it to be confusing to patients. Efforts are needed to educate clinicians regarding information sharing, understand patient and family perspectives, and develop best practices to enhance communication through electronic notes.
Can Data Sharing Become the Path of Least Resistance?

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001949

2016-01-26

PLoS Medicine

Abstract:In this month’s editorial, the PLOS Medicine editors note recent progress towards data sharing as the community norm in medical research and the barriers that remain.

medicine, general & internal
Sharing Medical Big Data While Preserving Patient Confidentiality in Innovative Medicines Initiative: A Summary and Case Report from BigData@Heart

Megan Schröder,Sam H A Muller,Eleni Vradi,Johanna Mielke,Yvonne M F Lim,Fabrice Couvelard,Menno Mostert,Stefan Koudstaal,Marinus J C Eijkemans,Christoph Gerlinger

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/big.2022.0178

IF: 4.426

Big Data

Abstract:Sharing individual patient data (IPD) is a simple concept but complex to achieve due to data privacy and data security concerns, underdeveloped guidelines, and legal barriers. Sharing IPD is additionally difficult in big data-driven collaborations such as Bigdata@Heart in the Innovative Medicines Initiative, due to competing interests between diverse consortium members. One project within BigData@Heart, case study 1, needed to pool data from seven heterogeneous data sets: five randomized controlled trials from three different industry partners, and two disease registries. Sharing IPD was not considered feasible due to legal requirements and the sensitive medical nature of these data. In addition, harmonizing the data sets for a federated data analysis was difficult due to capacity constraints and the heterogeneity of the data sets. An alternative option was to share summary statistics through contingency tables. Here it is demonstrated that this method along with anonymization methods to ensure patient anonymity had minimal loss of information. Although sharing IPD should continue to be encouraged and strived for, our approach achieved a good balance between data transparency while protecting patient privacy. It also allowed a successful collaboration between industry and academia.
Challenges and Opportunities in Disease Surveillance and Cardiovascular Epidemiology for the Centennial Collection

Carlos J. Rodriguez,Mercedes C. Carnethon,Donna K. Arnett,Donald M. Lloyd-Jones

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/circoutcomes.123.010011

2024-10-17

Circulation Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes

Abstract:Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes, Volume 17, Issue 10, Page e010011, October 1, 2024.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems
Policy Strategies to Advance Cardiovascular Health in the United States—Building on a Century of Progress

Rishi K. Wadhera,Karen E. Joynt Maddox

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/circoutcomes.123.010149

2024-04-18

Circulation Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes

Abstract:Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes, Volume 17, Issue 4, Page e010149, April 1, 2024.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems
Retraction: Cardiovascular Disease, Drug Therapy, and Mortality in Covid-19. N Engl J Med. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2007621.

Mandeep R Mehra,Sapan S Desai,SreyRam Kuy,Timothy D Henry,Amit N Patel,Mandeep R. Mehra,Sapan S. Desai,Timothy D. Henry,Amit N. Patel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmc2021225

IF: 158.5

2020-06-25

New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract:To the Editor: Because all the authors were not granted access to the raw data and the raw data could not be made available to a third-party auditor, we are unable to validate the primary data sour...

medicine, general & internal
What Do We Mean by Sharing of Patient Data? DaSH - A Data Sharing Hierarchy of Privacy and Ethical Challenges

Richard Schreiber,Ross Koppel,Bonnie Kaplan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2373-3291

2024-07-25

Abstract:Background: Sharing of clinical data is common and necessary for patient care, research, public health, and innovation. The term "data sharing," however, is often ambiguous in its many facets and complexities-each of which involves ethical, legal, and social issues. To our knowledge there is no extant hierarchy of data sharing that assesses these issues. Objective: Develop a hierarchy explicating the risks and ethical complexities of data sharing with particular focus on patient data privacy. Methods: We surveyed the available peer-reviewed and gray literature, and with our combined extensive experience in bioethics and medical informatics, created this hierarchy. Results: We present six ways data are shared and provide a tiered Data Sharing Hierarchy (DaSH) of risks, showing increasing threats to patients' privacy and to clinicians and organizations as one progresses up the hierarchy from data sharing for direct patient care, public health and safety, scientific research, commercial purposes, complex combinations of the preceding efforts, and among networked third parties. We offer recommendations to enhance benefits of data sharing while mitigating risks and protecting patients' interests by: improving consenting; developing better policies and procedures; clarifying, simplifying, and updating regulation to include all health-related data regardless of source; expanding the scope of bioethics for information technology; and increasing ongoing monitoring and research. Conclusions: Data sharing, while essential for patient care, is increasingly complex, opaque, and perhaps perilous for patients, clinicians and healthcare institutions. Risks increase with advances in technology and with more encompassing patient data from wearables and artificial intelligence database mining. Clinical significance: Data sharing places responsibilities on all parties: patients, clinicians, researchers, educators, risk managers, attorneys, informaticists, bioethicists, institutions, and policy makers.
Understanding How People with Cardiovascular Disease Conceptualize Sharing Personal Health Data with Peers

Jhon Adrián Cerón-Guzmán,Daniel Tetteroo,Jun Hu,Panos Markopoulos

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19159508

IF: 4.614

2022-08-02

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

Abstract:As people deal with cardiovascular disease (CVD), they are to self-monitor routinely and be aware of complications and the corresponding course of action. Engaging in these self-care behaviors is conducive to gaining knowledge of health status. Even so, knowledge of the self may be insufficient in making sense of chronic conditions. In constructing a new normal after health-related life disruptions, people often turn to peers (others facing similar health issues) and share personal health information with each other. Although health information-sharing behavior is well-documented, it remains underexplored what attitudes individuals with chronic conditions, such as CVD, have toward disclosing personal health data to peers and exploring those of others with similar conditions. We surveyed 39 people who reported being diagnosed with CVD to understand how they conceptualize sharing personal health data with their peers. By analyzing qualitative survey data thematically, we found that respondents expressed themselves as uncertain about the benefits of interacting with peers in such a manner. At the same time, they recognized an opportunity to learn new ideas to enhance CVD self-care in mutual data sharing. We also report participants' analytical orientation toward this sort of data sharing herein and elaborate on what sharing a range of personal health data could mean. In light of the existing literature, this study unpacks the notion of sharing in a different population/pathology and with more nuance, particularly by distinguishing between disclosing one's data and exploring others'.

public, environmental & occupational health,environmental sciences
Variation in pediatric and adolescent electronic health data sharing practices under the 21st Century Cures Act

Shikha Sinha,Michael Bedgood,Raghuveer Puttagunta,Akaash Kataria,Fabienne Bourgeois,Jennifer A Lee,Jennifer Vodzak,Eric Hall,Bruce Levy,David K Vawdrey

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocad172

2023-11-17

Abstract:Objective: To describe real-world practices and variation in implementation of the Information Blocking provisions amongst healthcare organizations caring for pediatric patients. Materials and methods: An online survey regarding implementation practices was distributed to representatives from 10 participating US healthcare organizations located in 6 different states. The survey was followed by structured interviews conducted through video conference. Information was gathered about implementation practices at each organization, with a focus on patient and proxy portal access to, and segmentation capabilities of, certain data classes listed in the United States Core Data for Interoperability Version 1. Results: All organizations had implemented the information blocking provisions at their institution. All organizations utilized different portal account types for proxies and users. All organizations reported the capability of sharing labs, medications, problem lists, imaging, and notes with the parent/guardian of the non-adolescent minor user with differences in how sensitive elements within the data classes were protected. Variability existed in how data was shared with the remaining user types. Discussion: Significant variability exists in how organizations have implemented the information blocking rules. Variation in data sharing and data access between institutions can result in privacy breaches and create confusion about completeness of data for patients and families. Conclusion: Healthcare organizations have utilized varying strategies to comply with the information blocking provisions of the 21st Century Cures Act. Increased clarity from the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology on minor, adolescent, and caregiver privacy and improved segmentation capabilities from Electronic Health Record vendors is needed.
Patients Waiting for Cues: Information Asymmetries and Challenges in Sharing Patient-Generated Data in the Clinic

Chi Young Oh,Yuhan Luo,Beth St. Jean,Eun Kyoung Choe

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3512954

2022-03-30

Abstract:Patient-generated data (PGD) show great promise for informing the delivery of personalized and patient-centered care. However, patients' data tracking does not automatically lead to data sharing and discussion with clinicians, which can make it difficult to utilize and derive optimal benefit from PGD. In this paper, we investigate whether and how patients share their PGD with clinicians and the types of challenges that arise within this context. We describe patients' immediate experiences of PGD sharing with clinicians, based on our short onsite interviews with 57 patients who had just met with a clinician at a university health center. Our analyses identified overarching patterns in patients' PGD sharing practices and the associated challenges that arise from the information asymmetry between patients and clinicians and from patients' reliance on their memory to share their PGD. We discuss the implications of our findings for designing PGD-integrated health IT systems in ways to support patients' tracking of relevant PGD, clinicians' effective engagement with patients around PGD, and the efficient sharing and review of PGD within clinical settings.
Sharing privacy-sensitive access to neuroimaging and genetics data: a review and preliminary validation

Anand D Sarwate,Sergey M Plis,Jessica A Turner,Mohammad R Arbabshirani,Vince D Calhoun

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fninf.2014.00035

2014-04-07

Abstract:The growth of data sharing initiatives for neuroimaging and genomics represents an exciting opportunity to confront the "small N" problem that plagues contemporary neuroimaging studies while further understanding the role genetic markers play in the function of the brain. When it is possible, open data sharing provides the most benefits. However, some data cannot be shared at all due to privacy concerns and/or risk of re-identification. Sharing other data sets is hampered by the proliferation of complex data use agreements (DUAs) which preclude truly automated data mining. These DUAs arise because of concerns about the privacy and confidentiality for subjects; though many do permit direct access to data, they often require a cumbersome approval process that can take months. An alternative approach is to only share data derivatives such as statistical summaries-the challenges here are to reformulate computational methods to quantify the privacy risks associated with sharing the results of those computations. For example, a derived map of gray matter is often as identifiable as a fingerprint. Thus alternative approaches to accessing data are needed. This paper reviews the relevant literature on differential privacy, a framework for measuring and tracking privacy loss in these settings, and demonstrates the feasibility of using this framework to calculate statistics on data distributed at many sites while still providing privacy.
The challenges of research data management in cardiovascular science: a DGK and DZHK position paper-executive summary

Sabine Steffens,Katrin Schröder,Martina Krüger,Christoph Maack,Katrin Streckfuss-Bömeke,Johannes Backs,Rolf Backofen,Bettina Baeßler,Yvan Devaux,Ralf Gilsbach,Jordi Heijman,Jochen Knaus,Rafael Kramann,Dominik Linz,Allyson L Lister,Henrike Maatz,Lars Maegdefessel,Manuel Mayr,Benjamin Meder,Sara Y Nussbeck,Eva A Rog-Zielinska,Marcel H Schulz,Albert Sickmann,Gökhan Yigit,Peter Kohl

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00392-023-02303-3

Abstract:The sharing and documentation of cardiovascular research data are essential for efficient use and reuse of data, thereby aiding scientific transparency, accelerating the progress of cardiovascular research and healthcare, and contributing to the reproducibility of research results. However, challenges remain. This position paper, written on behalf of and approved by the German Cardiac Society and German Centre for Cardiovascular Research, summarizes our current understanding of the challenges in cardiovascular research data management (RDM). These challenges include lack of time, awareness, incentives, and funding for implementing effective RDM; lack of standardization in RDM processes; a need to better identify meaningful and actionable data among the increasing volume and complexity of data being acquired; and a lack of understanding of the legal aspects of data sharing. While several tools exist to increase the degree to which data are findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable (FAIR), more work is needed to lower the threshold for effective RDM not just in cardiovascular research but in all biomedical research, with data sharing and reuse being factored in at every stage of the scientific process. A culture of open science with FAIR research data should be fostered through education and training of early-career and established research professionals. Ultimately, FAIR RDM requires permanent, long-term effort at all levels. If outcomes can be shown to be superior and to promote better (and better value) science, modern RDM will make a positive difference to cardiovascular science and practice. The full position paper is available in the supplementary materials.
Data sharing: A new editorial initiative of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors

F. Alfonso

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12471-017-0974-3

2017-04-03

Netherlands Heart Journal

Abstract:The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) provides recommendations to improve the editorial standards and scientific quality of biomedical journals. These recommendations range from uniform technical requirements to more complex and elusive editorial issues including ethical aspects of the scientific process. Recently, registration of clinical trials, conflicts of interest disclosure, and new criteria for authorship – emphasising the importance of responsibility and accountability – have been proposed. Last year, a new editorial initiative to foster sharing of clinical trial data was launched. This review discusses this novel initiative with the aim of increasing awareness among readers, investigators, authors and editors belonging to the Editors’ Network of the European Society of Cardiology.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems
Clinical Study Report and Individual Participant Data Transparency for US Food and Drug Administration–Approved Anticancer Drugs: A Call for Systematic Data Availability

Natansh D. Modi,Sandra M. Swain,Marc Buyse,Nicole M. Kuderer,Andrew Rowland,Frank W. Rockhold,Michael J. Sorich,Ashley M. Hopkins

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.24.00539

IF: 45.3

2024-06-27

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract:Unlocking the full potential of clinical trials through comprehensive CSR and IPD sharing can revolutionize cancer care, enhance safety evaluations, and reduce bias in systematic reviews. It is time for all stakeholders to embrace transparency and advance patient-centered outcomes.

oncology

Cautionary Note on Data Sharing

Evaluation of Data Sharing After Implementation of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors Data Sharing Statement Requirement

Coronary Plaque Sampling Reveals Molecular Insights Into Coronary Artery Disease

Future of Patient-Reported Outcomes: Bringing Patients' Voices Into Health Care

Questionable practices in data and code sharing policy in high-profile medical journal and research

Fresh takes on five health data sharing domains: Quality, privacy, equity, incentives, and sustainability

The National Cardiovascular Data Registry Data Quality Program 2020: JACC State-of-the-Art Review

The 21st Century Cures Act: Inpatient Clinician Perceptions of Changes to Information Sharing at an Academic Medical Center

Can Data Sharing Become the Path of Least Resistance?

Sharing Medical Big Data While Preserving Patient Confidentiality in Innovative Medicines Initiative: A Summary and Case Report from BigData@Heart

Challenges and Opportunities in Disease Surveillance and Cardiovascular Epidemiology for the Centennial Collection

Policy Strategies to Advance Cardiovascular Health in the United States—Building on a Century of Progress

Retraction: Cardiovascular Disease, Drug Therapy, and Mortality in Covid-19. N Engl J Med. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2007621.

What Do We Mean by Sharing of Patient Data? DaSH - A Data Sharing Hierarchy of Privacy and Ethical Challenges

Understanding How People with Cardiovascular Disease Conceptualize Sharing Personal Health Data with Peers

Variation in pediatric and adolescent electronic health data sharing practices under the 21st Century Cures Act

Patients Waiting for Cues: Information Asymmetries and Challenges in Sharing Patient-Generated Data in the Clinic

Sharing privacy-sensitive access to neuroimaging and genetics data: a review and preliminary validation

The challenges of research data management in cardiovascular science: a DGK and DZHK position paper-executive summary

Data sharing: A new editorial initiative of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors

Clinical Study Report and Individual Participant Data Transparency for US Food and Drug Administration–Approved Anticancer Drugs: A Call for Systematic Data Availability