Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases 1/2019

Open Access 01-12-2019 | Research

Share and protect our health data: an evidence based approach to rare disease patients’ perspectives on data sharing and data protection - quantitative survey and recommendations

Authors: Sandra Courbier, Rebecca Dimond, Virginie Bros-Facer

Published in: Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases | Issue 1/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The needs and benefits of sharing health data to advance scientific research and improve clinical benefits have been well documented in recent years, specifically in the field of rare diseases where knowledge and expertise are limited and patient populations are geographically dispersed. Understanding what patients want and need from rare disease research and data sharing is important to ensure their participation and engagement in the process, and to ensure that these wishes and needs are embedded within research design. EURORDIS-Rare Diseases Europe regularly surveys the rare disease community to identify its perspectives and needs on a number of issues in order to represent rare disease patients and be their voice within European and International initiatives and policy developments.
Here, we present key findings from a large quantitative survey conducted with patients with rare diseases and family members as part of a continuous evidence-based advocacy process developed at EURORDIS. The aim of this survey was to explore patient and family perspectives on data sharing and data protection in research and healthcare settings and develop relevant recommendations to support shaping of future data sharing initiatives in rare disease research.
This survey, translated into 23 languages, was carried out via the Rare Barometer Programme and was designed to be accessible to a diverse population with a wide range of education backgrounds. It was widely disseminated via patient organisations worldwide to ensure that a wide range of voices and experiences were represented.

Main findings

Rare disease patients, regardless of the severity of their disease and their socio-demographic profile, are clearly supportive of data sharing to foster research and improve healthcare. However, rare disease patients’ willingness to share their data does come with specific requirements in order to respect their privacy, choices and needs for information regarding the use of their data.

Conclusions

To ensure sustainability and success of international data sharing initiatives in health and research for rare diseases, appropriate legislations need to be implemented and multi-stakeholder efforts need to be pursued to foster cultural and technological changes enabling the systematic integration of patients’ preferences regarding sharing of their own health data.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference ACMG Board of Directors. Laboratory and clinical genomic data sharing is crucial to improving genetic health care: a position statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Genetics in Medicine. 2017;19(7):721–2.CrossRef ACMG Board of Directors. Laboratory and clinical genomic data sharing is crucial to improving genetic health care: a position statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Genetics in Medicine. 2017;19(7):721–2.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Allsop J, Jones K, Baggot R. Health consumer groups in the UK: a new social movement? Sociology of Health & Illness. 2004;26(6):737–56.CrossRef Allsop J, Jones K, Baggot R. Health consumer groups in the UK: a new social movement? Sociology of Health & Illness. 2004;26(6):737–56.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Browson R, Chriqui J, Stamatakis K. Understanding evidence-based public health policy. Am J Public Health. 2009;99(9):1576–83.CrossRef Browson R, Chriqui J, Stamatakis K. Understanding evidence-based public health policy. Am J Public Health. 2009;99(9):1576–83.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Budin-Ljøsne, et al. Dynamic consent: a potential solution to some of the challenges of modern biomedical research. BMC Medical Ethics. 2017;18:4.CrossRef Budin-Ljøsne, et al. Dynamic consent: a potential solution to some of the challenges of modern biomedical research. BMC Medical Ethics. 2017;18:4.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Burke K, Clarke A. The challenge of consent in clinical genome-wide testing. Disease in Childhood. 2016;101(11):1048–52.CrossRef Burke K, Clarke A. The challenge of consent in clinical genome-wide testing. Disease in Childhood. 2016;101(11):1048–52.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Contreras JL. Nih’s genomic data sharing policy: timing and tradeoffs. Trends Genet. 2015;31(2):55–7.CrossRef Contreras JL. Nih’s genomic data sharing policy: timing and tradeoffs. Trends Genet. 2015;31(2):55–7.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Contreras JL, Reichman J. Sharing by design: data and decentralized commons. Science. 2015;350(6266):1312–4.CrossRef Contreras JL, Reichman J. Sharing by design: data and decentralized commons. Science. 2015;350(6266):1312–4.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Court J, Mendizabal E, Osborne D, Young J. Policy engagement: how civil society can be more effective; 2006. Court J, Mendizabal E, Osborne D, Young J. Policy engagement: how civil society can be more effective; 2006.
10.
go back to reference Darquay S, et al. Patient/family views on data sharing in rare diseases: study in the European LeukoTreat project. Eur J Hum Genet. 2016;24(3):338–43.CrossRef Darquay S, et al. Patient/family views on data sharing in rare diseases: study in the European LeukoTreat project. Eur J Hum Genet. 2016;24(3):338–43.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference El Emam K, Rodgers S, Malin B. Anonymising and sharing individual patient data. BMJ. 2015;350:h1139.CrossRef El Emam K, Rodgers S, Malin B. Anonymising and sharing individual patient data. BMJ. 2015;350:h1139.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference European Commission. Attitudes on data protection and electronic identity in the European Union. Special Eurobarometer 359; 2010. Accessed Oct 2018 European Commission. Attitudes on data protection and electronic identity in the European Union. Special Eurobarometer 359; 2010. Accessed Oct 2018
14.
go back to reference European Commission. Data protection report. Special Eurobarometer 431; 2015. European Commission. Data protection report. Special Eurobarometer 431; 2015.
15.
go back to reference European Commission. Transformation of health and Care in the Digital Single Market; 2017. European Commission. Transformation of health and Care in the Digital Single Market; 2017.
16.
go back to reference European Commission. Commission recommendation of 6.2.2019 on a European electronic health record exchange format; 2019. European Commission. Commission recommendation of 6.2.2019 on a European electronic health record exchange format; 2019.
17.
go back to reference EURORDIS-Rare. Diseases Europe: Juggling Care and Daily Life: The balancing act of the rare disease community; 2017. EURORDIS-Rare. Diseases Europe: Juggling Care and Daily Life: The balancing act of the rare disease community; 2017.
18.
go back to reference EURORDIS-Rare. Diseases Europe: Rare disease patients’ participation in research; 2018. EURORDIS-Rare. Diseases Europe: Rare disease patients’ participation in research; 2018.
19.
go back to reference Evangelista T, Hedley V, Bushby K. The context for the thematic grouping of rare diseases to facilitate the establishment of European reference networks. Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases. 2016;11:17.CrossRef Evangelista T, Hedley V, Bushby K. The context for the thematic grouping of rare diseases to facilitate the establishment of European reference networks. Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases. 2016;11:17.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Figueiredo AS. Data sharing: convert challenges into opportunities. Frontiersfrontiers in Public Health. 2017;5:327.CrossRef Figueiredo AS. Data sharing: convert challenges into opportunities. Frontiersfrontiers in Public Health. 2017;5:327.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Gainotti S, et al. Improving the informed consent process in international collaborative rare disease research: effective consent for effective research. Eur J Hum Genet. 2016;24:1248–54.CrossRef Gainotti S, et al. Improving the informed consent process in international collaborative rare disease research: effective consent for effective research. Eur J Hum Genet. 2016;24:1248–54.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Genetic Alliance UK. Genome sequencing: what do patients think? 2015. Accessed Sept 2018. Genetic Alliance UK. Genome sequencing: what do patients think? 2015. Accessed Sept 2018.
25.
go back to reference Griggs RC, et al. Clinical research for rare disease: opportunities, challenges, and solutions. Mol Genet Metab. 2009;96(1):20–6.CrossRef Griggs RC, et al. Clinical research for rare disease: opportunities, challenges, and solutions. Mol Genet Metab. 2009;96(1):20–6.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Haeusermann T, et al. Genes wide open: data sharing and the social gradient of genomic privacy. AJOB Empirical Bioethics. 2018;9(4):207–21.CrossRef Haeusermann T, et al. Genes wide open: data sharing and the social gradient of genomic privacy. AJOB Empirical Bioethics. 2018;9(4):207–21.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Hallowell N, Parker M, Nellåker C. Big data phenotyping in rare diseases: some ethical issues. Genetics in Medicine. 2018;21:272–4.CrossRef Hallowell N, Parker M, Nellåker C. Big data phenotyping in rare diseases: some ethical issues. Genetics in Medicine. 2018;21:272–4.CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Kaare S, Chowdhury N, Kazi V. The power of evidence in advocacy: resource pack for trainers on evidence-based policy advocacy in East Africa; 2007. Accessed Oct 2018. Kaare S, Chowdhury N, Kazi V. The power of evidence in advocacy: resource pack for trainers on evidence-based policy advocacy in East Africa; 2007. Accessed Oct 2018.
29.
go back to reference Lochmüller H, et al. RD-connect, NeurOmics and EURenOmics: collaborative European initiative for rare diseases. Eur J Hum Genet. 2018;26(6):778–85.CrossRef Lochmüller H, et al. RD-connect, NeurOmics and EURenOmics: collaborative European initiative for rare diseases. Eur J Hum Genet. 2018;26(6):778–85.CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Mathers N, et al. The use of NHS patient data: report by the National Data Guardian for health and care. Br J Gen Pract. 2017;67(655):56–7.CrossRef Mathers N, et al. The use of NHS patient data: report by the National Data Guardian for health and care. Br J Gen Pract. 2017;67(655):56–7.CrossRef
31.
go back to reference McCormack P, et al. ‘You should at least ask’. The expectations, hopes and fears of rare disease patients on large-scale data and biomaterial sharing for genomics research. Eur J Hum Genet. 2016;24(10):1403–8.CrossRef McCormack P, et al. ‘You should at least ask’. The expectations, hopes and fears of rare disease patients on large-scale data and biomaterial sharing for genomics research. Eur J Hum Genet. 2016;24(10):1403–8.CrossRef
32.
go back to reference McHugh M. The chi-square test of independence. Biochemia Medica. 2013;23(2):143–9.CrossRef McHugh M. The chi-square test of independence. Biochemia Medica. 2013;23(2):143–9.CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Merkel P, et al. The partnership of patient advocacy groups and clinical investigators in the rare diseases clinical research network. Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases. 2016;11:66.CrossRef Merkel P, et al. The partnership of patient advocacy groups and clinical investigators in the rare diseases clinical research network. Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases. 2016;11:66.CrossRef
34.
go back to reference Minion JT, et al. The ethics conundrum in recall by genotype (RbG) research: perspectives from birth cohort participants. PLoS One. 2018;13(8):e0202502.CrossRef Minion JT, et al. The ethics conundrum in recall by genotype (RbG) research: perspectives from birth cohort participants. PLoS One. 2018;13(8):e0202502.CrossRef
35.
go back to reference Odierna D, Bero L. Retaining participants in outpatient and community-based health studies: researchers and participants in their own words. HSS Author Manuscripts. 2014;4(4):1–11. Odierna D, Bero L. Retaining participants in outpatient and community-based health studies: researchers and participants in their own words. HSS Author Manuscripts. 2014;4(4):1–11.
36.
37.
go back to reference Public and Patient Perceptions of Clinical Research, CISRP, 2017, Accessed Nov 2018. Public and Patient Perceptions of Clinical Research, CISRP, 2017, Accessed Nov 2018.
39.
go back to reference Rehm HL. Evolving health care through personal genomics. Nat Rev Genet. 2017;18(4):259–67.CrossRef Rehm HL. Evolving health care through personal genomics. Nat Rev Genet. 2017;18(4):259–67.CrossRef
40.
go back to reference Sirchia F, et al. Recontacting or not recontacting? A survey of current practices in clinical genetics centres in Europe. Eur J Hum Genet. 2018;26(7):946–54. Sirchia F, et al. Recontacting or not recontacting? A survey of current practices in clinical genetics centres in Europe. Eur J Hum Genet. 2018;26(7):946–54. 
41.
go back to reference Spencer K, Sanders C, Dixon WG. Patient perspectives on sharing anonymized personal health data using a digital system for dynamic consent and research feedback: a qualitative study. J Med Internet Res. 2016;18(4):e66.CrossRef Spencer K, Sanders C, Dixon WG. Patient perspectives on sharing anonymized personal health data using a digital system for dynamic consent and research feedback: a qualitative study. J Med Internet Res. 2016;18(4):e66.CrossRef
42.
go back to reference Takashima K, et al. Ethical concerns on sharing genomic data including patients’ family members. BMC Medical Ethics. 2018;19(1):61.CrossRef Takashima K, et al. Ethical concerns on sharing genomic data including patients’ family members. BMC Medical Ethics. 2018;19(1):61.CrossRef
43.
go back to reference The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is the most important change in data privacy regulation in 20 years. https://eugdpr.org/. Accessed Nov 2018. The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is the most important change in data privacy regulation in 20 years. https://​eugdpr.​org/​. Accessed Nov 2018.
44.
go back to reference Thompson R, et al. RD-connect: an integrated platform connecting databases, registries, biobanks and clinical bioinformatics for rare disease research. J Gen Intern Med. 2014;29(3):780–7.CrossRef Thompson R, et al. RD-connect: an integrated platform connecting databases, registries, biobanks and clinical bioinformatics for rare disease research. J Gen Intern Med. 2014;29(3):780–7.CrossRef
45.
go back to reference Zyskind G, Nathan O, Pentland A. Decentralizing privacy: using Blockchain to protect personal data. Journal of Information Security and Cryptography (Enigma); 2015. Zyskind G, Nathan O, Pentland A. Decentralizing privacy: using Blockchain to protect personal data. Journal of Information Security and Cryptography (Enigma); 2015.
Metadata
Title
Share and protect our health data: an evidence based approach to rare disease patients’ perspectives on data sharing and data protection - quantitative survey and recommendations
Authors
Sandra Courbier
Rebecca Dimond
Virginie Bros-Facer
Publication date
01-12-2019
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases / Issue 1/2019
Electronic ISSN: 1750-1172
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13023-019-1123-4

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases 1/2019 Go to the issue