Negotiating the reuse of health-data
Research, Big Data, and the European General Data Protection Regulation
Dados Bibliográficos
| ID | 7667922 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Johannes Starkbaum (0000-0003-2514-3289, Institut für Höhere Studien - Institute for Advanced Studies (IHS), autor correspondente), U Felt (0000-0001-7506-4234, University of Vienna) |
| Ano | 2019 |
| Volume | 6 |
| Fascículo | 2 |
| Páginas | 205395171986259 |
| Data de publicação | 2019-07-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sim |
| Open Access | Sim |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Periódico | Big Data & Society (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores do periódico | ISSN: 2053-9517 • E-ISSN: 2053-9517 |
| Editora | SAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/2053951719862594 |
| OpenAlex | W2963982939 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citações recebidas | 11 |
| Referências citadas | 28 |
Before the EU General Data Protection Regulation entered into force in May 2018, we witnessed an intense struggle of actors associated with data-dependent fields of science, in particular health-related academia and biobanks striving for legal derogations for data reuse in research. These actors engaged in a similar line of argument and formed issue alliances to pool their collective power. Using descriptive coding followed by an interpretive analysis, this article investigates the argumentative repertoire of these actors and embeds the analysis in ethical debates on data sharing and biobank-related data governance. We observe efforts to perform a paradigmatic shift of the discourse around the General Data Protection Regulation-implementation away from ‘protecting data’ as key concern to ‘protecting health’ of individuals and societies at large. Instead of data protection, the key risks stressed by health researchers became potential obstacles to research. In line, exchange of information with data subjects is not a key concern in the arguments of biobank-related actors and it is assumed that patients want ‘their’ data to be used. We interpret these narratives as a ‘reaction’ to potential restrictions for data reuse and in line with a broader trend towards Big Data science, as the very idea of biobanking is conceptualized around long-term use of readily prepared data. We conclude that a sustainable implementation of biobanks needs not only to comply with the General Data Protection Regulation, but must proactively re-imagine its relation to citizens and data subjects in order to account for the various ways that science gets entangled with society
Big data · Biobank · Business · Corporate governance · Data governance · Data Protection Act 1998 · Data quality · Data sharing · General Data Protection Regulation · Political science · Public relations · Sociology · Biomedical Ethics and Regulation · Computer Science · Ethics in Clinical Research · Law · Medicine · Patient Dignity and Privacy
Selective visibility in datafied states
Research themes in big data analytics for policymaking
Anticipatory Governance in Biobanking
Ethical Issues in Social Science Research Employing Big Data
Datafication, Power and Control in Development
Privacy engineering and the techno-regulatory imaginary
The ethics and value of contact tracing apps
Should I provide my health data for research? Citizens assessing the value of data provision
De novo kin
Disambiguating the benefits and risks from public health data in the digital economy
Big Tech platforms in health research
Solidarity in Biomedicine and Beyond
Dynamic consent
The Ethics of Big Data
The Quantified Self
Acting in an uncertain world
Authoritative Governance
Ethnography
Oocyte markets
Gift Relationships in Genetics Research
Open consent, biobanking and data protection law
Framing in context
Big Data, new epistemologies and paradigm shifts
Refusing the information paradigm
A Companion to Qualitative Research
| Obras citantes distintas | 11 |
|---|---|
| Citações por ano | 1,83 |
| Intervalo de citações | 2020 - 2026 (7) |
| Velocidade de citação | current |
| Altamente citado | Não |
| Tipos de citação | Neutras: 10 |