In Search of a Problem: Mapping Controversies over NHS (England) Patient Data with Digital Tools

Abstract

There is a long history in science and technology studies (STS) of tracking problematic objects, such as controversies, matters of concern, and issues, using various digital tools. But what happens when public problems do not play out in these familiar ways? In this paper, we will think through the methodological implications of studying “problems” in relation to recent events surrounding the sharing of patient data in the National Health Service in the United Kingdom. When a data sharing agreement called care.data was announced in 2013, nearly 1.5 million citizens chose to opt out. Yet, in subsequent years, there has been little evidence of a robust public mobilising around data sharing. We will attempt to track this elusive ‘non problem’ using some digital tools developed in STS for the purpose of mapping issues and problem definitions within science. Although we find these digital tools are unable to capture the “problem,” the process of searching helps us map the terrain of the case and forces us to consider wider definitions.

The Double Darkness of Digitalization: Shaping Digital-ready Legislation to Reshape the Conditions for Public-sector Digitalization

“…Furthermore, simplifying legislation and drafting it to fit a binary logic to allow for more automation (see also Hildebrandt 2016) may clash with parliamentarians’ intentions. However, despite its significance and potential consequences, digital-ready legislation has gone remarkably unnoticed in the public debate, 4 making it appear to be what Moats and McFall (2018, 8) referred to as a “dormant issue.” Except for some internal discussions in the central administration and among a few legal experts who have voiced concern, the processes, practices, and responsibilities for developing and drafting digital-ready legislation and the potentially far-reaching consequences are neither well-described nor debated.…”

Big Data = Big Trouble for Universal Healthcare? The Effects of Individualized Health Insurance on Solidarity

“…As the risk is priced individually, benefits and costs are realized individually, too. On an individual level, patients may face bias, discrimination (Blasimme et al, 2019;Moor & Lury, 2018), and especially privacy risks (Blakesley & Yallop, 2019;Moats & McFall, 2019) associated with data-based individualized HI.…”

Covid-19: When Species and Data Meet

“…These anxieties about data security and privacy are often met with guarantees and assurances from the authorities, agencies, and organisations responsible for technologies and data collection that data is secure and will only be used for intended purposes (Iveson and Maalsen 2019 ). As a previous NHS example described by Moats and McFall ( 2019 ) illustrates, initiating public trust and maintaining it are important when digital technologies are introduced. Care.data 1 was introduced by the NHS in 2014.…”