Abstract:Clinical research on human subjects or their data is confronted with conflicting requirements with, on the one hand, the principle of open science (transparency and data sharing), the possibilities offered by big data and the reuse of healthcare or research data, and on the other, changes to the regulatory and legislative framework, including the general data protection regulation (GDPR).A roundtable was organized in Giens, France in October 2018 to identify problem areas, the need for clarification and stream… Show more
“…Dean F. Sittig and Hardeep Singh [9] proposed a four steps socio-technical approach that organizations can undertake to secure an electronic health record system: (1) To ensure adequate system protection by correctly installing and configuring computers and networks (2) To ensure more reliable system defense by implementing user focused strategies (3) To ensure a comprehensive system monitoring of suspicious activities, and (4) To respond, to recover, to investigate, and to learn from ransomware attacks. For practical implementation, we recommend: (1) to plan seasonal assessments of information security management systems and to try to meet the international standards for information security with long-term and comprehensive perspectives as recommended by W.-S. Park at al [10], (2) to reduce the end point complexity (due to a technology saturated environment) and improving internal stakeholder alignment as recommended by M.S. Jalali, and J.P. Kaiser [11].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although the consequences of GDPR have been widely discussed, the violations have not been described in medical literature. Since May 2018, the GDPR provides the mandatory legal framework for all data processing including European citizens' personal data [1]. National authorities across the European Union can sanction any company or administration performing non-conform data processing regarding to the GDPR.…”
Although the consequences of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) have been widely discussed, the violations have not been described in medical literature. In this study, we focus our analyses on the data breach notifications, in France, defined in the article 4 of GDPR as “a breach of security resulting, accidentally or unlawfully, in the destruction, loss, alteration, unauthorized disclosure of personal data transmitted, stored or otherwise processed, or unauthorized access to such data.” Among 3,824 data breach notifications reported between May 2018 and February 2020, 244 (6.4%) is related to the health sector. Loss of confidentiality is the most important breach (80.7%) in this sector, followed by the loss of availability (27.5%). Malicious cause occurred in 58.2% of them. We hypothesized a phenomenon of underreported data breach incidents in health due to a mismatch between cybersecurity and data privacy issues.
“…Dean F. Sittig and Hardeep Singh [9] proposed a four steps socio-technical approach that organizations can undertake to secure an electronic health record system: (1) To ensure adequate system protection by correctly installing and configuring computers and networks (2) To ensure more reliable system defense by implementing user focused strategies (3) To ensure a comprehensive system monitoring of suspicious activities, and (4) To respond, to recover, to investigate, and to learn from ransomware attacks. For practical implementation, we recommend: (1) to plan seasonal assessments of information security management systems and to try to meet the international standards for information security with long-term and comprehensive perspectives as recommended by W.-S. Park at al [10], (2) to reduce the end point complexity (due to a technology saturated environment) and improving internal stakeholder alignment as recommended by M.S. Jalali, and J.P. Kaiser [11].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although the consequences of GDPR have been widely discussed, the violations have not been described in medical literature. Since May 2018, the GDPR provides the mandatory legal framework for all data processing including European citizens' personal data [1]. National authorities across the European Union can sanction any company or administration performing non-conform data processing regarding to the GDPR.…”
Although the consequences of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) have been widely discussed, the violations have not been described in medical literature. In this study, we focus our analyses on the data breach notifications, in France, defined in the article 4 of GDPR as “a breach of security resulting, accidentally or unlawfully, in the destruction, loss, alteration, unauthorized disclosure of personal data transmitted, stored or otherwise processed, or unauthorized access to such data.” Among 3,824 data breach notifications reported between May 2018 and February 2020, 244 (6.4%) is related to the health sector. Loss of confidentiality is the most important breach (80.7%) in this sector, followed by the loss of availability (27.5%). Malicious cause occurred in 58.2% of them. We hypothesized a phenomenon of underreported data breach incidents in health due to a mismatch between cybersecurity and data privacy issues.
“…Nous pensons qu'il est temps de réunir les principaux financeurs et acteurs de la recherche clinique française pour définir d'une politique efficiente de partage, concrète, réfléchie et de mettre en place une évaluation des bénéfices apportées par ces politiques. Une telle politique de partage devra bien entendu prendre en compte la réglementation française relative à la protection des données et le règlement général sur la protection des données [18]. Elle devra aussi prendre en compte le positionnement des patients inclus dans les études pour lequels les attitudes vis-à-vis du partage sont positives [19].…”
Les politiques de partage de données des financeurs d'essais cliniques en France
Data sharing policies of funders of clinical trials in FrancePolitique de partage de données
“…18 Similarly, the European Union’s recently enacted general data protection regulation is raising questions about data access, use, and sharing policies across the world. 19–21 Thus, while public sharing of data is highly desirable as it is a means to support important medical advances, it cannot be universally recommended or required.…”
Section: Who Pays For the Cost Of Data Collection And Who Can Determmentioning
Artificial intelligence and deep learning methods hold great promise in the medical sciences in areas such as enhanced tumor identification from radiographic images, and natural language processing to extract complex information from electronic health records. Scientific review of AI algorithms has involved reproducibility, in which investigators share protocols, raw data, and programming codes. Within the realm of medicine, reproducibility introduces important challenges, including risk to patient privacy, challenges in reproducing results, and questions regarding ownership and financial value of large medical datasets. Scientific review, however, mandates some form of resolution of these inherent conflicts. We propose several approaches to permit scientific review while maintaining patient privacy and data confidentiality.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.