Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Designing Ethical Practice in Biosurveillance

The Project Argus Doctrine

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Infectious Disease Informatics and Biosurveillance

Part of the book series: Integrated Series in Information Systems ((ISIS,volume 27))

Chapter Overview

Biosurveillance entails the collection and analysis of information needed to provide early warning of outbreaks of infectious disease, both naturally occurring and intentionally introduced. Data derived from repositories containing various types of sensitive information may be required for this purpose, including individually identifiable, copyrighted, and proprietary information. The Project Argus Biosurveillance Doctrine was developed to ensure that ethical and legal principles guide the collection and handling of such information. Project Argus does not, however, use individually identifiable information or any material derived from individually identifiable information for any phase of the project. Further, Project Argus is not used for purposes of law enforcement, counterterrorism, or public health surveillance. This chapter details why and how the doctrine was developed and summarizes its guiding principles and key elements.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 279.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Wilson, J., Polyak, M., Blake, J., and Collmann, J. A Heuristic Indication and Warning Staging Model for Detection and Assessment of Biological Events. Journal of American Medical Informatics Association 15(2) (2008 Mar/Apr), 158–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Fisher, K., Hogstedt, K., Rogers, A., and Smith, F. (2002). Hancock 2.0.1 Manual, AT&T Labs Shannon Laboratory http://www.research.

  3. Odom, W.E. (2003). Fixing Intelligence for a More Secure America. New Haven, CT:Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Department of Health and Human Services; Office of the Secretary. (2002). Final Rule.45 CFR Part 160, 162, and 164, standards for privacy of individually identifiable health information. Federal Register 67, no. 157 (14 August), 53181–53273.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Department of Health and Human Services; Office of the Secretary. (2003) Final rule. 45CFR Part 160, 162, and 164, security standards. Federal Register 68, no. 34 (20 February),8333–8381.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Crews, Jr., C. The Pentagon’s total information awareness project: Americans under the microscope? National Review Online, (2002 25 November).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cooper, T., and Collmann, J. (2005). Managing Information Security and Privacy in Health Care Data Mining. In, Advances in Medical Informatics: Knowledge Management and Data Mning in Biomedicine, New York, NY: Springer Science; pp. 95–137.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency; Information Awareness Office. (2003).Report to Congress regarding the terrorist information awareness program: in response to consolidated appropriations resolution, Pub. L. No. 108-7, Division M, § 111(b); 20 May.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Department of Defense; Office of the Inspector General, Information Technology Management. (2003). Terrorist information awareness program. Report D-2004–033; 12 December.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Department of Health and Human Services; Office for Human Research Protections.(2004). Guidance on research involving coded private information or biological specimens. 10 August. Available at http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/cdebiol.pdf.

  11. Department of Health and Human Services; National Institutes of Health Office for Protection from Research Risks. (2001). Protection of human subjects. 45 C.F.R. § 46.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Department of Health and Human Services. (2003). Protecting personal health information in research: understanding the HIPAA privacy rule. NIH publication no. 03–5388.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Federal Trade Commission. (1999). In brief: the financial privacy requirements of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. Available at http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/buspubs/glbshort.htm.

  14. Fisher, K., Hogstedt, K., Rogers, A., and Smith, F. (2002). Hancock 2.0.1 Manual. Florham Park, NJ: AT&T Labs Shannon Laboratory.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Mack, G., Bebee, B., Shafi, I., Wenzel, G., Medairy, B., and Yuan, E. (2002) Total Information Awareness Program (TIA) System Description Document (SDD) v1.1.Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency Information Awareness Office. White Paper; 19 July.

    Google Scholar 

  16. National Institutes of Health. (2004). Clinical research and the HIPAA privacy rule. NIH publication no. 04–5495.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Safire, W. You are a suspect The New York Times, (2002 14 November). Available from: http://www.commondreams.org/views02/1114–08.htm.

  18. Simons, B., and Spafford, E. Letter to Honorable John Warner, Chairman, Senate Committee on Armed Forces; (2003 23 January).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Stanley, J., and Steinhardt, B. (2003) Bigger monster, weaker chains: the growth of an American surveillance society. American Civil Liberties Union, Technology and Liberty Program. White Paper.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Sweeney, L. ed. (2003). Navigating computer science research through waves of privacy concerns. Carnegie Mellon University, School of Computer Science, Pittsburgh, Technical report, CMU CS 03–165, CMU-ISRI-03–102.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Taipale, K. Data mining and domestic security: connecting the dots to make sense ofdata. The Columbia Science and Technology Law Review 5 (2003), 5–83.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Taylor, S. Big brother and another overblown privacy scare. Atlantic Online, (2002 10 December).

    Google Scholar 

  23. The Washington Post. Total information awareness. Editorial, (2002 16 November).

    Google Scholar 

Suggested Reading

  1. Cooper, T., and Collmann, J. (2005) Managing Information Security and Privacy in Health Care Data Mining. In, Advances in Medical Informatics: Knowledge Management and Data Mining in Biomedicine, New York, NY: Springer Science; pp. 95–137.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Collmann, J., and Cooper, T. Breaching the Security of the Kaiser Permanente Internet Patient Portal: The Organizational Foundations of Information Security. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 14 (2007 Mar), 239–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Cooper, T., Collmann, J., and Neidermeier, H. Organizational repertoires and rites in health information security. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, in press.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Department of Health and Human Services; Office of the Secretary. (2003). Final rule. 45 CFR Part 160, 162, and 164, security standards. Federal Register 68, no. 34 (20 February), 8333–8381.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Department of Health and Human Services. (2003). Protecting personal health information in research: understanding the HIPAA privacy rule. NIH publication no. 03–5388.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Odom, W.E. (2003) Fixing Intelligence for a More Secure America. New Haven, CT:Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Sweeney, L. ed. (2003). Navigating computer science research through waves of privacy concerns. Carnegie Mellon University, School of Computer Science, Pittsburgh, Technical report, CMU CS 03–165, CMU-ISRI-03–102.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Taipale, K. Data mining and domestic security: connecting the dots to make sense ofdata. The Columbia Science and Technology Law Review 5 (2003) 5–83.

    Google Scholar 

Online Resources

  1. US Fair Trade Commission, Fair Information Practice Principles, http://www.ftc.gov/reports/privacy3/fairinfo.shtm

  2. US Department of Commerce, Safe Harbor, http://www.export.gov/safeharbor/sh_overview.html

  3. Health Information Management System Society, HIMSS Privacy and Security Toolkit http://www.himss.org/ASP/privacySecurityTree.asp?faid=78&tid=4#PSToolkit#PSToolkit

  4. US Department of Health and Human Service, HIPAA Privacy Support, http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/hipaa/

  5. US Department of Health and Human Service, HPAA Privacy and Security Rules,http://aspe.hhs.gov/ADMNSIMP/

  6. Caralli, R.A., Stevens, J.F., Wallen, CM., White, D.W., Wilson, W.R., and Young, L.R.Introducing the CERT Resiliency Engineering Framework: Improving the Security and Sustainability Processes, Software Engineering Institute, http://www.sei.cmu.edu/publications/documents/07.reports/07tr009.html

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, Disease Prevention and Health Outcomes, School of Nursing and Health Studies, Georgetown University Medical Center, 571107, 3700 Reservoir Rd, NW, Washington, DC, 20057-1107, USA

    Jeff Collmann

  2. The MITRE Corporation, 7515 Colshire Drive, McLean, VA, 22102, USA

    Adam Robinson

Authors
  1. Jeff Collmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Adam Robinson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeff Collmann .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. Mathematics & Statistics, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, USA

    Carlos Castillo-Chavez

  2. Eller College of Management, University of Arizona, E. Helen St. 1130, Tucson, 85721, Arizona, USA

    Hsinchun Chen

  3. Health Sciences Center, University of Washington, NE. Pacific St. 1959, Seattle, 98195, Washington, USA

    William B. Lober

  4. School of Veterinary Medicine, Dept. Medicine & Epidemiology, University of California, Davis, Shields Avenue 1, Davis, 95616, California, USA

    Mark Thurmond

  5. Eller College of Management, Dept. Management Information Systems, University of Arizona, Tucson, 85721, Arizona, USA

    Daniel Zeng

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Collmann, J., Robinson, A. (2011). Designing Ethical Practice in Biosurveillance. In: Castillo-Chavez, C., Chen, H., Lober, W., Thurmond, M., Zeng, D. (eds) Infectious Disease Informatics and Biosurveillance. Integrated Series in Information Systems, vol 27. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6892-0_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6892-0_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-6891-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4419-6892-0

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation