» Articles » PMID: 33248520

Preferences for Accessing Electronic Health Records for Research Purposes: Views of Parents Who Have a Child With a Known or Suspected Genetic Condition

Overview
Journal Value Health
Publisher Elsevier
Date 2020 Nov 29
PMID 33248520
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to examine parental preferences for researchers accessing their child's electronic health record across 3 groups: those with a child with (1) a known genetic condition (fragile X syndrome FXS), (2) a suspected genetic condition (autism spectrum disorder [ASD]), and (3) no known genetic condition (typically developing).

Methods: After extensive formative work, a discrete choice experiment was designed consisting of 5 attributes, each with 2 or 3 levels, including (1) type of researcher, (2) the use of personally identifiable information, (3) the use of sensitive information, (4) personal importance of research, and (5) return of results. Stratified mixed logit and latent class conditional logit models were examined.

Results: Parents of children with FXS or ASD had relatively higher preferences for research conducted by nonprofits than parents of typically developing children. Parents of children with ASD also preferred research using non-identifiable and nonsensitive information. Parents of children with FXS or ASD also had preferences for research that was personally important and returned either summary or individual results. Although a few child and family characteristics were related to preferences, they did not overall define the subgroups of parents.

Conclusions: Although electronic health record preference research has been conducted with the general public, this is the first study to examine the opinions of parents who have a child with a known or suspected genetic condition. These parents were open to studies using their child's electronic health record because they may have more to gain from this type of research.

Citing Articles

Combined extended reality and reinforcement learning to promote healthcare and reduce social anxiety in fragile X syndrome: a new assessment tool and a rehabilitative strategy.

Stasolla F, Passaro A, Di Gioia M, Curcio E, Zullo A Front Psychol. 2024; 14:1273117.

PMID: 38179497 PMC: 10765535. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1273117.


Clinical Research: A Review of Study Designs, Hypotheses, Errors, Sampling Types, Ethics, and Informed Consent.

Purna Singh A, Vadakedath S, Kandi V Cureus. 2023; 15(1):e33374.

PMID: 36751199 PMC: 9898800. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.33374.


How rare and common risk variation jointly affect liability for autism spectrum disorder.

Klei L, McClain L, Mahjani B, Panayidou K, De Rubeis S, Grahnat A Mol Autism. 2021; 12(1):66.

PMID: 34615521 PMC: 8495987. DOI: 10.1186/s13229-021-00466-2.

References
1.
Geschwind D . Genetics of autism spectrum disorders. Trends Cogn Sci. 2011; 15(9):409-16. PMC: 3691066. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2011.07.003. View

2.
Chew L, Bradley K, Boyko E . Brief questions to identify patients with inadequate health literacy. Fam Med. 2004; 36(8):588-94. View

3.
Knapp E, Fink A, Goss C, Sewall A, Ostrenga J, Dowd C . The Cystic Fibrosis Foundation Patient Registry. Design and Methods of a National Observational Disease Registry. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2016; 13(7):1173-9. DOI: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201511-781OC. View

4.
Griggs R, Batshaw M, Dunkle M, Gopal-Srivastava R, Kaye E, Krischer J . Clinical research for rare disease: opportunities, challenges, and solutions. Mol Genet Metab. 2008; 96(1):20-6. PMC: 3134795. DOI: 10.1016/j.ymgme.2008.10.003. View

5.
Carter P, Laurie G, Dixon-Woods M . The social licence for research: why care.data ran into trouble. J Med Ethics. 2015; 41(5):404-9. PMC: 4431337. DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2014-102374. View