Authorising the Release of Data without Consent for Health Research: The Role of Data Custodians and HRECs in Australia

Felicity Flack, Carolyn Adams, Judy Allen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

In Australia, access to administrative data for research without consent invokes a plethora of governance requirements. Whether these requirements are met is assessed by at least one human research ethics committee (HREC) and each of the custodians of the relevant data collections. In this article, we examined and compared the decision-making processes of data custodians and HRECs. These processes were investigated using three case studies and qualitative interviews with data custodians around Australia. The investigation demonstrated that there was significant overlap and duplication in the review of applications for access to data without consent between HRECs and data custodians. This was the result of overlapping requirements in the relevant legislation and policies with those in the National Statement for Ethical Conduct in Human Research 2007 (updated 2018) as well as confusion about the distinct roles of HRECs and data custodians.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)655-680
Number of pages26
JournalJournal of Law and Medicine
Volume26
Issue number3
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2019

Cite this

@article{3f840dd5dd634b1cbf771f2fe867fe9f,
title = "Authorising the Release of Data without Consent for Health Research: The Role of Data Custodians and HRECs in Australia",
abstract = "In Australia, access to administrative data for research without consent invokes a plethora of governance requirements. Whether these requirements are met is assessed by at least one human research ethics committee (HREC) and each of the custodians of the relevant data collections. In this article, we examined and compared the decision-making processes of data custodians and HRECs. These processes were investigated using three case studies and qualitative interviews with data custodians around Australia. The investigation demonstrated that there was significant overlap and duplication in the review of applications for access to data without consent between HRECs and data custodians. This was the result of overlapping requirements in the relevant legislation and policies with those in the National Statement for Ethical Conduct in Human Research 2007 (updated 2018) as well as confusion about the distinct roles of HRECs and data custodians.",
keywords = "data linkage, data linkage research, research ethics, data custodians, government-held data, access to data, data sharing, administrative decision-making, administrative data, privacy, MEDICAL-RESEARCH, LINKAGE, CONFIDENTIALITY, INFORMATION",
author = "Felicity Flack and Carolyn Adams and Judy Allen",
year = "2019",
month = "4",
language = "English",
volume = "26",
pages = "655--680",
journal = "Journal of Law and Medicine",
issn = "1320-159X",
publisher = "THOMSON REUTERS AUSTRALIA LTD",
number = "3",

}

Authorising the Release of Data without Consent for Health Research : The Role of Data Custodians and HRECs in Australia. / Flack, Felicity; Adams, Carolyn; Allen, Judy.

In: Journal of Law and Medicine, Vol. 26, No. 3, 04.2019, p. 655-680.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Authorising the Release of Data without Consent for Health Research

T2 - The Role of Data Custodians and HRECs in Australia

AU - Flack, Felicity

AU - Adams, Carolyn

AU - Allen, Judy

PY - 2019/4

Y1 - 2019/4

N2 - In Australia, access to administrative data for research without consent invokes a plethora of governance requirements. Whether these requirements are met is assessed by at least one human research ethics committee (HREC) and each of the custodians of the relevant data collections. In this article, we examined and compared the decision-making processes of data custodians and HRECs. These processes were investigated using three case studies and qualitative interviews with data custodians around Australia. The investigation demonstrated that there was significant overlap and duplication in the review of applications for access to data without consent between HRECs and data custodians. This was the result of overlapping requirements in the relevant legislation and policies with those in the National Statement for Ethical Conduct in Human Research 2007 (updated 2018) as well as confusion about the distinct roles of HRECs and data custodians.

AB - In Australia, access to administrative data for research without consent invokes a plethora of governance requirements. Whether these requirements are met is assessed by at least one human research ethics committee (HREC) and each of the custodians of the relevant data collections. In this article, we examined and compared the decision-making processes of data custodians and HRECs. These processes were investigated using three case studies and qualitative interviews with data custodians around Australia. The investigation demonstrated that there was significant overlap and duplication in the review of applications for access to data without consent between HRECs and data custodians. This was the result of overlapping requirements in the relevant legislation and policies with those in the National Statement for Ethical Conduct in Human Research 2007 (updated 2018) as well as confusion about the distinct roles of HRECs and data custodians.

KW - data linkage

KW - data linkage research

KW - research ethics

KW - data custodians

KW - government-held data

KW - access to data

KW - data sharing

KW - administrative decision-making

KW - administrative data

KW - privacy

KW - MEDICAL-RESEARCH

KW - LINKAGE

KW - CONFIDENTIALITY

KW - INFORMATION

M3 - Article

VL - 26

SP - 655

EP - 680

JO - Journal of Law and Medicine

JF - Journal of Law and Medicine

SN - 1320-159X

IS - 3

ER -