What Patients, Students and Doctors Think About Permission to Publish Patient Photographs in Academic Journals: A Cross-Sectional Survey in Croatia

Roguljić, Marija; Peričić, Tina Poklepović; Gelemanović, Andrea; Jukić, Anita; Šimunović, Dina; Buljan, Ivan; Marušić, Matko; Marušić, Ana; Wager, Elizabeth

doi:10.1007/s11948-019-00134-y

Cited by 6 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Of the 30 articles included in the analysis, 6 (20%) investigated the publication of facial photographs in scientific journals as the main topic [ 2 , 3 , 7 , 32 , 35 , 36 ]. Other studies (24/30, 80%) had the publication of medical photography as one of the topics, so only those results were included in this review.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most of the studies (26/30, 87%) had an observational or cross-sectional design ( Table 1 ), 3% (1/30) were randomized controlled trials [ 6 ], 3% (1/30) used another experimental design [ 28 ], and 7% (2/30) used qualitative approaches [ 23 , 25 ]. Reported limitations were the small number of participants [ 8 , 12 , 26 , 27 , 34 ], pilot studies [ 22 ], a single type of health professional included [ 6 , 8 , 9 , 25 , 29 ], years of clinical practice for specialists [ 9 ], poor response rate [ 26 , 27 , 33 , 34 ], possibility of socially desirable answers [ 29 , 35 ], and a single study setting [ 21 , 22 , 25 , 29 ]. The limitations of the studies performed on data or journals were the small number of journals [ 7 , 36 ], small number of analyzed journal issues [ 2 ], filters for web-based image search, and the fluctuating number of available web-based images from academic journals [ 3 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A small number of studies (4/20, 20%) investigated other health professionals’ opinions regarding ethical publishing of medical photography, involving residents, students, nurses, nursing technicians, and physical therapists [ 11 , 30 , 31 , 35 ]. These studies reported that health professionals in general had a lack of knowledge regarding the need to obtain patient written consent and the use of patient medical photographs in general.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Publishing Identifiable Patient Photographs in Scientific Journals: Scoping Review of Policies and Practices

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Publishing identifiable patient data in scientific journals may jeopardize patient privacy and confidentiality if best ethical practices are not followed. Current journal practices show considerable diversity in the publication of identifiable patient photographs, and different stakeholders may have different opinions of and practices in publishing patient photographs. Objective This scoping review aimed to identify existing evidence and map knowledge gaps in medical research on the policies and practices of publishing identifiable photographs in scientific articles. Methods We performed a comprehensive search of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, CINAHL with Full Text, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Ovid MEDLINE, and Scopus. The Open Science Framework, PROSPERO, BASE, Google Scholar, OpenGrey, ClinicalTrials.gov, the Campbell Collaboration Library, and Science.gov were also searched. Results After screening the initial 15,949 titles and abstracts, 98 (0.61%) publications were assessed for eligibility at the full-text level, and 30 (0.19%) publications were included in this review. The studies were published between 1994 and 2020; most had a cross-sectional design and were published in journals covering different medical disciplines. We identified 3 main topics. The first included ethical aspects of the use of facial photographs in publications. In different clinical settings, the consent process was not conducted properly, and health professionals did not recognize the importance of obtaining written patient consent for taking and using patient medical photographs. They often considered verbal consent sufficient or even used the photographs without consent. The second topic included studies that investigated the practices and use of medical photography in publishing. Both patients and doctors asked for confidential storage and maintenance of medical photographs. Patients preferred to be photographed by their physicians using an institutional camera and preferred nonidentifiable medical photographs not only for publication but also in general. Conventional methods of deidentification of facial photographs concealing the eye area were recognized as unsuccessful in protecting patient privacy. The third topic emerged from studies investigating medical photography in journal articles. These studies showed great diversity in publishing practices regarding consent for publication of medical photographs. Journal policies regarding the consent process and consent forms were insufficient, and existing ethical professional guidelines were not fully implemented in actual practices. Patients’ photographs from open-access medical journals were found on public web-based platforms. Conclusions This scoping review showed a diversity of practices in publishing identifiable patient photographs and an unsatisfactory level of knowledge of this issue among different stakeholders despite existing standards. Emerging issues include the availability of patients’ photographs from open-access journals or preprints in the digital environment. There is a need to improve standards and processes to obtain proper consent to fully protect the privacy of patients in published articles.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Publishing Identifiable Patient Photographs in Scientific Journals: Scoping Review of Policies and Practices

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, as an alternative, if the patient is willing to consent to publication of an image, the acceptable level of anonymity could be decided by the patient and included in the consent. As previous studies have found patients have a strongly increased preference towards use of non-identifiable photographs in all modes of distribution (Lau et al, 2010; Roguljić, Peričić, et al, 2020), the novel deidentification methods presented in this study require further testing to assess the acceptance for publication across all modes of distribution among patient stakeholders.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) state that photographs should not be published unless the patient provides written informed consent to allow publication if there is any doubt that complete anonymity has not been achieved (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, 1995). Whilst the majority of patients consent to identifiable images being used for case notes, journals, and teaching, there is a strongly increased preference towards use of non-identifiable photographs in all modes of distribution (Lau, Schumacher, & Irwin, 2010;Roguljic , Peričic , et al, 2020). However, a paucity of research exists on the effectiveness of deidentification methods used to provide anonymity.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Informed Consent In Facial Photograph Publishing: A Cross-sectional Pilot Study To Determine The Effectiveness Of Deidentification Methods

Preston

Meng

Zheng

et al. 2022

Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study determined the effectiveness of three deidentification methods: use of a) a black box to obscure facial landmarks, b) a letterbox view to display restricted facial landmarks and c) a half letterbox view. Facial images of well-known celebrities were used to create a series of decreasingly deidentified images and displayed to participants in a structured interview session. 55.5% were recognised when all facial features were covered using a black box, leaving only the hair and neck exposed. The letterbox view proved more effective, reaching over 50% recognition only once the periorbital region, eyebrows, and forehead were visible. The half letterbox was the most effective, requiring the nose to be revealed before recognition reached over 50%, and should be the option of choice where appropriate. These findings provide valuable information for informed consent discussions, and we recommend consent to publish forms should stipulate the deidentification method that will be used.

show abstract

Consent for publishing patient photographs

Roguljić

Wager

2020

Case Reports in Women's Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What Patients, Students and Doctors Think About Permission to Publish Patient Photographs in Academic Journals: A Cross-Sectional Survey in Croatia

Cited by 6 publications

References 26 publications

Publishing Identifiable Patient Photographs in Scientific Journals: Scoping Review of Policies and Practices

Publishing Identifiable Patient Photographs in Scientific Journals: Scoping Review of Policies and Practices

Informed Consent In Facial Photograph Publishing: A Cross-sectional Pilot Study To Determine The Effectiveness Of Deidentification Methods

Consent for publishing patient photographs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About