Heightened attention to medical privacy: challenges for unbiased sample recruitment and a possible solution.

Subject recruitment for epidemiologic studies is associated with major challenges due to privacy laws now common in many countries. Privacy policies regarding recruitment methods vary tremendously across institutions, partly because of a paucity of information about what methods are acceptable to potential subjects. The authors report the utility of an opt-out method without prior physician notification for recruiting community-dwelling US women aged 65 years or older with incident breast cancer in 2003. Participants (n = 3,083) and possibly eligible nonparticipants (n = 2,664) were compared using characteristics derived from billing claims. Participation for persons with traceable contact information was 70% initially (2005-2006) and remained over 90% for 3 follow-up surveys (2006-2008). Older subjects and those living in New York State were less likely to participate, but participation did not differ on the basis of socioeconomic status, race/ethnicity, underlying health, or type of cancer treatment. Few privacy concerns were raised by potential subjects, and no complaints were lodged. Using opt-out methods without prior physician notification, a population-based cohort of older breast cancer subjects was successfully recruited. This strategy may be applicable to population-based studies of other diseases and is relevant to privacy boards making decisions about recruitment strategies acceptable to the public.

[1]  Nicholas A. Christakis,et al.  Measuring Disease-Free Survival and Cancer Relapse Using Medicare Claims From CALGB Breast Cancer Trial Participants (Companion to 9344) , 2006, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[2]  L. Irwig,et al.  Impact of privacy legislation on the number and characteristics of people who are recruited for research: a randomised controlled trial , 2006, Journal of Medical Ethics.

[3]  S. Galea,et al.  Participation rates in epidemiologic studies. , 2007, Annals of epidemiology.

[4]  Sarah M. Greene,et al.  Impact of IRB requirements on a multicenter survey of prophylactic mastectomy outcomes. , 2006, Annals of epidemiology.

[5]  Shirley A. Star,et al.  AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH , 1980 .

[6]  C. Klabunde,et al.  A refined comorbidity measurement algorithm for claims-based studies of breast, prostate, colorectal, and lung cancer patients. , 2007, Annals of epidemiology.

[7]  R. Sanson-Fisher,et al.  Reducing inequities in cancer care , 2009, Cancer.

[8]  Clare Jinks,et al.  Patterns of consent in epidemiologic research: evidence from over 25,000 responders. , 2004, American journal of epidemiology.

[9]  Lawrence O Gostin,et al.  Reforming the HIPAA Privacy Rule: safeguarding privacy and promoting research. , 2009, JAMA.

[10]  A. Gulsvik,et al.  Nonresponse in a community cohort study: predictors and consequences for exposure-disease associations. , 2002, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[11]  G. Riley,et al.  Trends in the Health Status of Medicare Risk Contract Enrollees , 2006, Health care financing review.

[12]  George J Annas,et al.  Medical privacy and medical research--judging the new federal regulations. , 2002, The New England journal of medicine.

[13]  K. Brazil,et al.  Access to medical records for research purposes: varying perceptions across research ethics boards , 2008, Journal of Medical Ethics.

[14]  Purushottam W. Laud,et al.  An Algorithm for the Use of Medicare Claims Data to Identify Women with Incident Breast Cancer , 2004 .

[15]  Thomas G. McLeod,et al.  Personality characteristics of health care satisfaction survey non-respondents. , 2009, International journal of health care quality assurance.

[16]  A Conti The recent Italian Consolidation Act on privacy: new measures for data protection. , 2006, Medicine and law.

[17]  Eva Kline-Rogers,et al.  Potential Impact of the HIPAA Privacy Rule on Data Collection in a Registry of Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome , 2005 .

[18]  Stephen B. Johnson,et al.  Central challenges facing the national clinical research enterprise. , 2003, JAMA.

[19]  R. Sandler,et al.  Research recruitment through US central cancer registries: balancing privacy and scientific issues. , 2006, American journal of public health.

[20]  Dawn Everington,et al.  Obstacles to conducting epidemiological research in the UK general population , 2004, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[21]  Roberta B. Ness,et al.  Influence of the HIPAA privacy rule on health research , 2008 .

[22]  R. Schilsky,et al.  The impact of the privacy rule on cancer research: variations in attitudes and application of regulatory standards. , 2009, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.