Personal health records: consumer attitudes toward privacy and security of their personal health information. Factors influencing the adoption of E-learning in Tabriz University of Medical Sciences. Determinant factors affecting the web-based training acceptance by health students, applying UTAUT model. Security and privacy of personal health record, electronic medical record and health information. Personal health records: a scoping review. 2015.Īrcher N, Fevrier-Thomas U, Lokker C, McKibbon KA, Straus SE. Barriers to adoption of consumer health informatics applications for health self management. Personal health records: definitions, benefits, and strategies for overcoming barriers to adoption. Tang PC, Ash JS, Bates DW, Overhage JM, Sands DZ. This study clearly acknowledged that confidentiality and privacy concerns were two main obstacles that should be considered when comprehensive implementation of PHR is in progress. PHR adoption has several significant advantages both to patients and health care providers. Also, the results confirmed the significant effect of confidentiality and privacy concerns about PHR adoption. The results show that the extended model of TAM, proposed in this study, can explain about 63% of the variance of the PHR adoption. The final model was tested by Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) and presented by AMOS. Collected data were analyzed by correlation and regression tests.
Patients’ perception regarding the effect of confidentiality and privacy concern on PHR adoption was examined by an extended model of Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). This was a cross – sectional study in which 175 patients referred to teaching hospitals of Tabriz University of Medical Sciences were randomly selected. This study was carried out to determine the effect of confidentiality and privacy concerns on PHR adoption. However, patients are often concerned about the confidentiality and privacy of their health information in PHR. How can a researcher argue that her questionnaire does not violate the duty of confidentiality if the researcher does not know the scope of that duty? Whatever the reason, making the rules about confidentiality confidential places additional and unnecessary roadblocks in the path of the researcher.With the adoption of Personal Health Record (PHR), patients take an active role in monitoring their health and can store and access a wide array of credible health information.
#Empirical research on effects of confidentiality code
Why such secrecy about a code of conduct for government employees? At the time, I wondered if denying researchers copies of the code of conduct, and thus preventing researchers from understanding the specific ethical duties placed on law clerks, resulted in researchers being unable to make a convincing case to former law clerks that their research agenda did not run afoul of the code of conduct. Thus, the justices can essentially define confidentiality as they see fit -confidentiality could include not only discussions about specific cases, but the kind of soup that was served at a justice's dinner party for the clerks or how many fouls Justice Byron White committed during a game of basketball on the "highest court in the land." In fact, the code allows the individual justices to create "more stringent" ethical standards than those imposed by the code.
The Code reminds the law clerk that the relationship between the law clerk and the justice is "essentially a confidential one," adding that the law clerk "cannot divulge any confidential information received in the course of the law clerk's duties." Curiously, the phrase "confidential information" is not defined. Relevant to this discussion, the code states that law clerks owe both their individual justices and the Court itself " complete confidentiality, accuracy, and loyalty" (emphasis added). The code of conduct is divided into six ethical canons. I later found a copy in the personal papers of Justice Thurgood Marshall at the Library of Congress. I then contacted Chief Justice Rehnquist's chambers, only to receive a short, curt letter from the Chief Justice himself - again denying my request to see a copy of the code. In writing my book, I contacted the Public Information Office of the Supreme Court and requested a copy of the code. Ironically, not only does the Code of Conduct for Law Clerks of the Supreme Court of the United States (March 3, 1989) create a duty of confidentiality, but in recent years the Supreme Court has made the code itself confidential. It appears that a common theme is emerging in our discussions about studying law clerks, to wit, the law clerk code of conduct.
0 kommentar(er)
