How should we think about clinical data ownership?

The concept of ‘ownership’ is increasingly central to debates, in the media, health policy and bioethics, about the appropriate management of clinical data. I argue that the language of ownership acts as a metaphor and reflects multiple concerns about current data use and the disenfranchisement of c...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Ballantyne, Angela (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: BMJ Publ. 2020
In: Journal of medical ethics
Year: 2020, Volume: 46, Issue: 5, Pages: 289-294
Online Access: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Volltext (kostenfrei)

MARC

LEADER 00000caa a22000002 4500
001 1816162442
003 DE-627
005 20230428063533.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 220908s2020 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1136/medethics-2018-105340  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1816162442 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1816162442 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Ballantyne, Angela  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
109 |a Ballantyne, Angela 
245 1 0 |a How should we think about clinical data ownership? 
264 1 |c 2020 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a The concept of ‘ownership’ is increasingly central to debates, in the media, health policy and bioethics, about the appropriate management of clinical data. I argue that the language of ownership acts as a metaphor and reflects multiple concerns about current data use and the disenfranchisement of citizens and collectives in the existing data ecosystem. But exactly which core interests and concerns ownership claims allude to remains opaque. Too often, we jump straight from ‘ownership’ to ‘private property’ and conclude ‘the data belongs to the patient’. I will argue here that private property is only one type of relevant relationship between people, communities and data. There are several reasons to doubt that conceptualising data as private property presents a compelling response to concerns about clinical data ownership. In particular I argue that clinical data are co-constructed, so a property account would fail to confer exclusive rights to the patient. A non-property account of ownership acknowledges that the data are ‘about the patient’, and therefore the patient has relevant interests, without jumping to the conclusion that the data ‘belongs to the patient’. On this broader account of ownership, the relevant harm is the severing of the connection between the patient and their data, and the solution is to re-engage and re-connect patients to the data research enterprise. 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Journal of medical ethics  |d London : BMJ Publ., 1975  |g 46(2020), 5, Seite 289-294  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)323607802  |w (DE-600)2026397-1  |w (DE-576)260773972  |x 1473-4257  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:46  |g year:2020  |g number:5  |g pages:289-294 
856 |u https://jme.bmj.com/content/medethics/46/5/289.full.pdf  |x unpaywall  |z Vermutlich kostenfreier Zugang  |h publisher [open (via page says license)] 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2018-105340  |x Resolving-System  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
856 4 0 |u http://jme.bmj.com/content/46/5/289.abstract  |x Verlag  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mteo 
936 u w |d 46  |j 2020  |e 5  |h 289-294 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4185616392 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1816162442 
LOK |0 005 20220908053748 
LOK |0 008 220908||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2022-08-03#AAC8AD67E301FD2E52FAC9F9C0C3EFA6CCEEC738 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixrk  |a zota 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw