Skip header and navigation

Refine By

87 records – page 1 of 9.

Access to health care information: legal imperative or moral responsibility?

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature104003
Source
Health Law Can. 1990;10(3):213-4
Publication Type
Article
Date
1990

Access to medical records for research purposes: varying perceptions across research ethics boards.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature158011
Source
J Med Ethics. 2008 Apr;34(4):308-14
Publication Type
Article
Date
Apr-2008
Author
D J Willison
C. Emerson
K V Szala-Meneok
E. Gibson
L. Schwartz
K M Weisbaum
F. Fournier
K. Brazil
M D Coughlin
Author Affiliation
Centre for Evaluation of Medicines, St Joseph's Healthcare, McMaster University, 105 Main Street East, P1, Hamilton, ON L8N 1G8, Canada. willison@mcmaster.ca
Source
J Med Ethics. 2008 Apr;34(4):308-14
Date
Apr-2008
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Biomedical Research - ethics - standards
Canada
Confidentiality - legislation & jurisprudence - psychology - standards
Ethics Committees, Research - ethics - standards
Humans
Medical Records - legislation & jurisprudence
Privacy - legislation & jurisprudence - psychology
Research Subjects - legislation & jurisprudence - psychology
Abstract
Variation across research ethics boards (REBs) in conditions placed on access to medical records for research purposes raises concerns around negative impacts on research quality and on human subject protection, including privacy.
To study variation in REB consent requirements for retrospective chart review and who may have access to the medical record for data abstraction.
Thirty 90-min face-to-face interviews were conducted with REB chairs and administrators affiliated with faculties of medicine in Canadian universities, using structured questions around a case study with open-ended responses. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and coded manually.
Fourteen sites (47%) required individual patient consent for the study to proceed as proposed. Three (10%) indicated that their response would depend on how potentially identifying variables would be managed. Eleven sites (38%) did not require consent. Two (7%) suggested a notification and opt-out process. Most stated that consent would be required if identifiable information was being abstracted from the record. Among those not requiring consent, there was substantial variation in recognising that the abstracted information could potentially indirectly re-identify individuals. Concern over access to medical records by an outside individual was also associated with requirement for consent. Eighteen sites (60%) required full committee review. Sixteen (53%) allowed an external research assistant to abstract information from the health record.
Large variation was found across sites in the requirement for consent for research involving access to medical records. REBs need training in best practices for protecting privacy and confidentiality in health research. A forum for REB chairs to confidentially share concerns and decisions about specific studies could also reduce variation in decisions.
PubMed ID
18375687 View in PubMed
Less detail

[A law for the management of patient data in health services. A task for the Patient Data Survey].

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature172305
Source
Lakartidningen. 2005 Sep 26-Oct 2;102(39):2775-6
Publication Type
Article

[A VIP lane for consumers of insurance companies to get certificates?].

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature186768
Source
Lakartidningen. 2003 Jan 9;100(1-2):70
Publication Type
Article
Date
Jan-9-2003

Canadian Act may mean greater access to personal medical records.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature195853
Source
Lancet. 2000 Dec 23-30;356(9248):2168
Publication Type
Article
Author
W. Kondro
Source
Lancet. 2000 Dec 23-30;356(9248):2168
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Canada
Confidentiality - legislation & jurisprudence
Humans
Medical Records - legislation & jurisprudence
PubMed ID
11191555 View in PubMed
Less detail

Canadian landmark case: L.C. and the Attorney General for Alberta v. Brian Joseph Mills.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature195820
Source
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 2000;28(4):460-4
Publication Type
Article
Date
2000

87 records – page 1 of 9.