scholarly journals AB189. SOH21AS236. General Data Protection Regulations [2018] and clinical research: perspectives of patients and doctors in a model four teaching hospital

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. AB189-AB189
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Maher ◽  
Matthew Gerard Davey ◽  
Peter Francis McAnena ◽  
Cliona McMenamin ◽  
John Phineas O’Donnell ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
Matthew G. Davey ◽  
John P.M. O’Donnell ◽  
Elizabeth Maher ◽  
Cliona McMenamin ◽  
Peter F. McAnena ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR, is a set of data protection rules on the acquisition, storage, use, and access of personal data. GDPR came into effect in May 2018 when it was introduced across all 27 European Union (EU) member states and the European Economic Area (EEA). Maintaining compliance with this legislation has presented significant new challenges for ongoing clinical research. Aims To evaluate the knowledge and expectations of patients and doctors regarding GDPR and implications for future clinical research. Methods An anonymous 12-item questionnaire was circulated to patients and doctors at a University Teaching Hospital. Data analysis included descriptive statistics. Results Five hundred nine participants were included: 261 females (51.3%) and 248 males (48.7%). Three hundred fifty were patients (68.8%) and 159 were doctors (31.2%). Three hundred thirty-four participants were aware of GDPR (65.7%): 116 doctors (73.0%) and 218 patients (62.3%, P = 0.018). 71.1% of doctors were willing to allow their personal data to be processed anonymously as part of a clinical research project compared to 43.4% of patients (P < 0.001). 80.2% of patients believed explicit consent is needed before using personal data in clinical research in comparison to 60.4% of doctors (P < 0.001). Level of education impacted awareness of GDPR (P < 0.001); a higher level of education among patients increased GDPR familiarity (P < 0.001), however failed to impact doctor familiarity (P = 0.117). Conclusion GDPR has introduced complexity to the processing and sharing of personal data among researchers. This study has identified differences in the perception of GDPR and willingness to consent to data being used in clinical research between doctors and patients. Measures to adequately inform prospective research participants on data processing and the evolving landscape of data protection regulation should be prioritised.


2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (5) ◽  
pp. 332
Author(s):  
Carlos Meneses-Oliveira

Some clinicians feel that Ethics Committees act as a blockade to observational clinical studies. In the case of retrospective studies some have tried to solve this problem by reducing this sensitive data to simple administrative data in the hands of the government. Others see the new European General Data Protection Regulation 2016/679 (European Union) as being more liberal than the Portuguese Law nº 21/2014, April 16th (Clinical Research Law). Both solutions presume participant consent from his / her silence, even if nobody truly tried to specifically inform him / her. Such views do collide with the guarantees of protection of patient’s ethical rights. In this article we propose an ethical alternative to those positions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document