Research Subject Privacy Protection in Otolaryngology

Michael C. Noone, Kenneth C Walters, M. Boyd Gillespie

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act regulations, which took effect on April 14, 2003, placed new constraints on the use of protected health information for research purposes. Objective: To review practices of research subject privacy protection in otolaryngology in order to determine steps necessary to achieve compliance with Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act regulations. Study Design: Literature review. Methods: Articles appearing in 2001 in 3 widely circulated otolaryngology journals were classified according to study design. The "Methods" section of each article was reviewed to determine whether the informed consent and institutional review board processes were clearly documented. Results: Descriptive studies involving case reports and case series were more common than observational studies that include a control group (66% vs 11%). Few case series documented the consent process (18%) and institutional review board process (19%). Observational designs demonstrated better documentation of the consent process (P<.001) and the institutional review board exemption and approval process (P<.001). Conclusions: Methods used to protect subject privacy are not commonly documented in case series in otolaryngology. More attention needs to be given to research subject privacy concerns in the otolaryngology literature in order to comply with Health insurance Portability and Accountability Act regulations.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)266-269
Number of pages4
JournalArchives of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery
Volume130
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2004

Fingerprint

Research Subjects
Privacy
Otolaryngology
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act
Research Ethics Committees
Informed Consent
Documentation
Observational Studies
Control Groups
Health
Research

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Otorhinolaryngology

Cite this

Research Subject Privacy Protection in Otolaryngology. / Noone, Michael C.; Walters, Kenneth C; Gillespie, M. Boyd.

In: Archives of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Vol. 130, No. 3, 01.03.2004, p. 266-269.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Noone, Michael C. ; Walters, Kenneth C ; Gillespie, M. Boyd. / Research Subject Privacy Protection in Otolaryngology. In: Archives of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery. 2004 ; Vol. 130, No. 3. pp. 266-269.
@article{9037a4ce006741a88bb8057b84c2aa52,
title = "Research Subject Privacy Protection in Otolaryngology",
abstract = "Background: Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act regulations, which took effect on April 14, 2003, placed new constraints on the use of protected health information for research purposes. Objective: To review practices of research subject privacy protection in otolaryngology in order to determine steps necessary to achieve compliance with Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act regulations. Study Design: Literature review. Methods: Articles appearing in 2001 in 3 widely circulated otolaryngology journals were classified according to study design. The {"}Methods{"} section of each article was reviewed to determine whether the informed consent and institutional review board processes were clearly documented. Results: Descriptive studies involving case reports and case series were more common than observational studies that include a control group (66{\%} vs 11{\%}). Few case series documented the consent process (18{\%}) and institutional review board process (19{\%}). Observational designs demonstrated better documentation of the consent process (P<.001) and the institutional review board exemption and approval process (P<.001). Conclusions: Methods used to protect subject privacy are not commonly documented in case series in otolaryngology. More attention needs to be given to research subject privacy concerns in the otolaryngology literature in order to comply with Health insurance Portability and Accountability Act regulations.",
author = "Noone, {Michael C.} and Walters, {Kenneth C} and Gillespie, {M. Boyd}",
year = "2004",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1001/archotol.130.3.266",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "130",
pages = "266--269",
journal = "JAMA Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery",
issn = "2168-6181",
publisher = "American Medical Association",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Research Subject Privacy Protection in Otolaryngology

AU - Noone, Michael C.

AU - Walters, Kenneth C

AU - Gillespie, M. Boyd

PY - 2004/3/1

Y1 - 2004/3/1

N2 - Background: Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act regulations, which took effect on April 14, 2003, placed new constraints on the use of protected health information for research purposes. Objective: To review practices of research subject privacy protection in otolaryngology in order to determine steps necessary to achieve compliance with Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act regulations. Study Design: Literature review. Methods: Articles appearing in 2001 in 3 widely circulated otolaryngology journals were classified according to study design. The "Methods" section of each article was reviewed to determine whether the informed consent and institutional review board processes were clearly documented. Results: Descriptive studies involving case reports and case series were more common than observational studies that include a control group (66% vs 11%). Few case series documented the consent process (18%) and institutional review board process (19%). Observational designs demonstrated better documentation of the consent process (P<.001) and the institutional review board exemption and approval process (P<.001). Conclusions: Methods used to protect subject privacy are not commonly documented in case series in otolaryngology. More attention needs to be given to research subject privacy concerns in the otolaryngology literature in order to comply with Health insurance Portability and Accountability Act regulations.

AB - Background: Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act regulations, which took effect on April 14, 2003, placed new constraints on the use of protected health information for research purposes. Objective: To review practices of research subject privacy protection in otolaryngology in order to determine steps necessary to achieve compliance with Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act regulations. Study Design: Literature review. Methods: Articles appearing in 2001 in 3 widely circulated otolaryngology journals were classified according to study design. The "Methods" section of each article was reviewed to determine whether the informed consent and institutional review board processes were clearly documented. Results: Descriptive studies involving case reports and case series were more common than observational studies that include a control group (66% vs 11%). Few case series documented the consent process (18%) and institutional review board process (19%). Observational designs demonstrated better documentation of the consent process (P<.001) and the institutional review board exemption and approval process (P<.001). Conclusions: Methods used to protect subject privacy are not commonly documented in case series in otolaryngology. More attention needs to be given to research subject privacy concerns in the otolaryngology literature in order to comply with Health insurance Portability and Accountability Act regulations.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=1542288033&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=1542288033&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1001/archotol.130.3.266

DO - 10.1001/archotol.130.3.266

M3 - Review article

C2 - 15023831

AN - SCOPUS:1542288033

VL - 130

SP - 266

EP - 269

JO - JAMA Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery

JF - JAMA Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery

SN - 2168-6181

IS - 3

ER -