Dataset Information

The perceived impact of location privacy: a web-based survey of public health perspectives and requirements in the UK and Canada.

ABSTRACT: The "place-consciousness" of public health professionals is on the rise as spatial analyses and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) are rapidly becoming key components of their toolbox. However, "place" is most useful at its most precise, granular scale - which increases identification risks, thereby clashing with privacy issues. This paper describes the views and requirements of public health professionals in Canada and the UK on privacy issues and spatial data, as collected through a web-based survey.Perceptions on the impact of privacy were collected through a web-based survey administered between November 2006 and January 2007. The survey targeted government, non-government and academic GIS labs and research groups involved in public health, as well as public health units (Canada), ministries, and observatories (UK). Potential participants were invited to participate through personally addressed, standardised emails.Of 112 invitees in Canada and 75 in the UK, 66 and 28 participated in the survey, respectively. The completion proportion for Canada was 91%, and 86% for the UK. No response differences were observed between the two countries. Ninety three percent of participants indicated a requirement for personally identifiable data (PID) in their public health activities, including geographic information. Privacy was identified as an obstacle to public health practice by 71% of respondents. The overall self-rated median score for knowledge of privacy legislation and policies was 7 out of 10. Those who rated their knowledge of privacy as high (at the median or above) also rated it significantly more severe as an obstacle to research (P < 0.001). The most critical cause cited by participants in both countries was bureaucracy.The clash between PID requirements - including granular geography - and limitations imposed by privacy and its associated bureaucracy require immediate attention and solutions, particularly given the increasing utilisation of GIS in public health. Solutions include harmonization of privacy legislation with public health requirements, bureaucratic simplification, increased multidisciplinary discourse, education, and development of toolsets, algorithms and guidelines for using and reporting on disaggregate data.

SUBMITTER: AbdelMalik P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2396622 | biostudies-literature | 2008 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The perceived impact of location privacy: a web-based survey of public health perspectives and requirements in the UK and Canada.

AbdelMalik Philip P Boulos Maged N Kamel MN Jones Ray R

BMC public health 20080509

<h4>Background</h4>The "place-consciousness" of public health professionals is on the rise as spatial analyses and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) are rapidly becoming key components of their toolbox. However, "place" is most useful at its most precise, granular scale - which increases identification risks, thereby clashing with privacy issues. This paper describes the views and requirements of public health professionals in Canada and the UK on privacy issues and spatial data, as collected ...[more]

PMID: 18471295

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundUnbalanced distribution of medical resources is becoming a major challenge, particularly in the selection of doctors. e-Consultation could provide patients with more choices of doctors and break the constraints of time and space. However, the acceptance of e-consultation is still poor and the mechanism of adoption is unclear.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to identify the factors influencing the public intention to use e-consultation and explore the effect path of the factors and behavior intention.MethodsThe hypotheses of our research model were developed based on the technology acceptance model and perceived risk theory. A web-based survey was conducted by an electronic questionnaire collection platform; this survey that consisted of a 29-item questionnaire with 5-point Likert scales was completed by 934 respondents. Structural equation modeling was used to analyze the data. Item evaluation and reliability, validity, path loading, goodness of fit, and multiple group analysis were used to check the moderation effects.ResultsThe standardized factor loadings of the items were between 0.551 and 0.873. The composite reliability of 9 constructs ranged from 0.706 to 0.840. The average variance extracted ranged from 0.387 to 0.640. The fitness indices showed that the collected data fitted well with the research model. Perceived usefulness was the strongest positive factor effecting behavior intention (β=.399, P<.001). Perceived ease of use had a positive effect on behavior intention but it was not statistically significant (β=.117, P=.07) and it had a positive effect on perceived usefulness (β=.537, P<.001). Perceived risk could be well explained by financial risk (β=.972, P<.001), privacy risk (β=.774, P<.001), social risk (β=.871, P<.001), time risk (β=.894, P<0.001), and psychological risk (β=.774, P<.001). Perceived risk had negative effects on perceived usefulness (β=-.375, P<.001) and behavior intention (β=-.297, P<.001). Personal innovativeness had a positive influence on perceived ease of use (β=.241, P<.001) and a slight effect on behavior intention (β=.124, P=.001). Age (χ258=133.5, P<.001) and usage experience (χ258=82.5, P=.02) had a slight moderation effect on the paths.ConclusionsPerceived usefulness and perceived risk have significant effects on public intention to use e-consultation. Therefore, platform and manufacturer must improve the function of e-consultation, which will promote the public intention to use e-consultation fundamentally. In order to control the perceived risk of public, government should play an important role in enforcing management of e-consultation markets and approving corresponding medical insurance policies. Besides, personal innovativeness had an effect on behavior intention. Moreover, the paths of factors had some heterogeneity among people with different characteristics. Therefore, it is necessary to adjust the strategies to fit more groups better.

Project description:BackgroundThe importance of health privacy protections in the era of the "Facebook Generation" has been called into question. The ease with which younger people share personal information about themselves has led to the assumption that they are less concerned than older generations about the privacy of their information, including health information. We explored whether survey respondents' views toward health privacy suggest that efforts to strengthen privacy protections as health information is moved online are unnecessary.MethodsUsing Amazon's Mechanical Turk (MTurk), which is well-known for recruitment for survey research, we distributed a 45-item survey to individuals in the U.S. to assess their perspectives toward privacy and security of online and health information, social media behaviors, use of health and fitness devices, and demographic information.Results1310 participants (mean age: 36 years, 50% female, 78% non-Hispanic white, 54% college graduates or higher) were categorized by generations: Millennials, Generation X, and Baby Boomers. In multivariate regression models, we found that generational cohort was an independent predictor of level of concern about privacy and security of both online and health information. Younger generations were significantly less likely to be concerned than older generations (all P < 0.05). Time spent online and social media use were not predictors of level of concern about privacy or security of online or health information (all P > 0.05).LimitationsThis study is limited by the non-representativeness of our sample.ConclusionsThough Millennials reported lower levels of concern about privacy and security, this was not related to internet or social media behaviors, and majorities within all generations reported concern about both the privacy and security of their health information. Thus, there is no intergenerational imperative to relax privacy and security standards, and it would be advisable to take privacy and security of health information more seriously.

Project description:BackgroundInternet interventions have been proposed to improve the accessibility and use of evidence-based psychological treatments. However, little is known about attitudes toward such treatments, which can be an important barrier to their use.ObjectiveThis study aimed to (1) determine attitudes toward guided internet interventions, (2) assess its acceptability compared with other internet-based formats, and (3) explore predictors of acceptance.MethodsA convenience-sample Web-based survey (N=646) assessed attitudes toward guided internet therapies (ie, perceived usefulness and helpfulness, and advantage relative to face-to-face therapy), preferences for delivery modes (ie, e-preference: guided internet interventions, unguided internet interventions, or videoconferencing psychotherapy), and potential predictors of attitudes and preferences: sociodemographics, help-seeking-related variables, attachment style, and perceived stress.ResultsAlthough most participants perceived internet interventions as useful or helpful (426/646, 65.9%), a few indicated their advantage relative to face-to-face therapy (56/646, 8.7%). Most participants preferred guided internet interventions (252/646, 39.0%) over videoconferencing psychotherapy (147/646, 22.8%), unguided internet interventions (124/646, 19.2%), and not using internet interventions (121/646, 18.8%; missing data: 1/646, 0.2%). Attachment avoidance and stress were related to e-preference (all P<.05). Moreover, preference for therapist-guided internet interventions was higher for individuals who were aware of internet-based treatment (χ26=12.8; P=.046).ConclusionsParticipants assessed therapist-guided internet interventions as helpful, but not equivalent to face-to-face therapies. The vast majority (523/646, 81.0%) of the participants were potentially willing to use internet-based approaches. In lieu of providing patients with only one specific low-intensity treatment, implementation concepts should offer several options, including guided internet interventions, but not limited to them. Conversely, our results also indicate that efforts should focus on increasing public knowledge about internet interventions, including information about their effectiveness, to promote acceptance and uptake.

Project description:BackgroundImprovements in communication and information technologies have allowed for the globalisation of health services, especially the provision of health services from other countries, such as the use of telemedicine. This has led countries to evaluate their position on whether and to what extent they should open their health systems to trade. This often takes place from the context of multi-lateral trade agreements (under the auspices of the World Trade Organisation), which is misplaced as a significant amount of trade takes place regionally or bi-laterally. We report here the results of a qualitative study assessing stakeholders' views on the potential for a bi-lateral trade relationship between India and the UK, where India acts as an exporter and the UK as an importer of telemedicine services.Methods19 semi-structured interviews were carried out with stakeholders from India and the UK. The themes discussed include prospects on the viability of a bi-lateral relationship between the UK and India on telemedicine, current activities and operations, barriers, benefits and risks.ResultsThe participants in general believed there were good prospects for telemedicine trade, and that this could bring benefits to "importing" countries in terms of cost-savings and faster delivery of care and to "exporting" countries in the form of foreign exchange and quality improvement. However, there were some concerns regarding quality of care, regulation, accreditation and data security.ConclusionsThere is potential for trade in this type of health services to succeed and bring about important benefits to the countries involved. However, issues around data security and accreditation need to be taken into consideration. Countries may wish to consider entering bi-lateral agreements, as they provide more potential to address the concerns and capitalise on the benefits. Finally, this paper concludes that more data should be collected, both on the volume of telemedicine trade and on the impact it is having on health systems, as currently there is very limited data on this.

Project description:BackgroundThe use of mobile devices in hospital care constantly increases. However, smartphones and tablets have not yet widely become official working equipment in medical care. Meanwhile, the parallel use of private and official devices in hospitals is common. Medical staff use smartphones and tablets in a growing number of ways. This mixture of devices and how they can be used is a challenge to persons in charge of defining strategies and rules for the usage of mobile devices in hospital care.ObjectiveTherefore, we aimed to examine the status quo of physicians' mobile device usage and concrete requirements and their future expectations of how mobile devices can be used.MethodsWe performed a web-based survey among physicians in 8 German university hospitals from June to October 2019. The online survey was forwarded by hospital management personnel to physicians from all departments involved in patient care at the local sites.ResultsA total of 303 physicians from almost all medical fields and work experience levels completed the web-based survey. The majority regarded a tablet (211/303, 69.6%) and a smartphone (177/303, 58.4%) as the ideal devices for their operational area. In practice, physicians are still predominantly using desktop computers during their worktime (mean percentage of worktime spent on a desktop computer: 56.8%; smartphone: 12.8%; tablet: 3.6%). Today, physicians use mobile devices for basic tasks such as oral (171/303, 56.4%) and written (118/303, 38.9%) communication and to look up dosages, diagnoses, and guidelines (194/303, 64.0%). Respondents are also willing to use mobile devices for more advanced applications such as an early warning system (224/303, 73.9%) and mobile electronic health records (211/303, 69.6%). We found a significant association between the technical affinity and the preference of device in medical care (χs2=53.84, P<.001) showing that with increasing self-reported technical affinity, the preference for smartphones and tablets increases compared to desktop computers.ConclusionsPhysicians in German university hospitals have a high technical affinity and positive attitude toward the widespread implementation of mobile devices in clinical care. They are willing to use official mobile devices in clinical practice for basic and advanced mobile health uses. Thus, the reason for the low usage is not a lack of willingness of the potential users. Challenges that hinder the wider adoption of mobile devices might be regulatory, financial and organizational issues, and missing interoperability standards of clinical information systems, but also a shortage of areas of application in which workflows are adapted for (small) mobile devices.

Dataset Information

The perceived impact of location privacy: a web-based survey of public health perspectives and requirements in the UK and Canada.

Publications

The perceived impact of location privacy: a web-based survey of public health perspectives and requirements in the UK and Canada.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets