The lidA Cohort Study (German Cohort Study on Work, Age, Health and Work Participation) was set up to investigate and follow the effects of work and work context on the physical and psychological health of the ageing workforce in Germany and subsequently on work participation. Cohort participants are initially employed people subject to social security contributions and born in either 1959 (n = 2909) or 1965 (n = 3676). They were personally interviewed in their homes in 2011 and will be visited every 3 years. Data collection comprises socio-demographic data, work and private exposures, work ability, work and work participation attitudes, health, health-related behaviour, personality and attitudinal indicators. Employment biographies are assessed using register data. Subjective health reports and physical strength measures are complemented by health insurance claims data, where permission was given. A conceptual framework has been developed for the lidA Cohort Study within which three confirmatory sub-models assess the interdependencies of work and health considering age, gender and socioeconomic status. The first set of the data will be available to the scientific community by 2015. Access will be given by the Research Data Centre of the German Federal Employment Agency at the Institute for Employment Research (http://fdz.iab.de/en.aspx).

The new European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) imposes enhanced requirements on digital data collection. This article reports from a 2018 German nationwide population-based probability app study in which participants were asked through a GDPR compliant consent process to share a series of digital trace data, including geolocation, accelerometer data, phone and text messaging logs, app usage, and access to their address books. With about 4,300 invitees and about 650 participants, we demonstrate (1) people were just as willing to share such extensive digital trace data as they were in studies with far more limited requests; (2) despite being provided more decision-related information, participants hardly differentiated between the different data requests made; and (3) once participants gave consent, they did not tend to revoke it. We also show (4) evidence for a widely-held belief that explanations regarding data collection and data usage are often not read carefully, at least not within the app itself, indicating the need for research and user experience improvement to adequately inform and protect participants. We close with suggestions to the field for creating a seal of approval from professional organizations to help the research community promote the safe use of data.