Advertisement

Confidentiality

  • Kathryn J. Hannah
  • Marion J. Ball
  • Margaret J. A. Edwards
Part of the Computers in Health Care book series (HI)

Abstract

The issue of privacy is difficult. The individual has the inherent right to control personal information. However, in order to provide the best possible care and service to the individual, public and private organizations must know some of that information. The issue is further complicated because “privacy” has not been defined in a way that is widely and generally accepted. Whieldon (1979) suggested, however, that the concept of “invasion of privacy” is generally recognized as an intrusion upon the private and personal life of an individual. Actions such as collecting and storing unnecessary personal data, disclosing data to individuals or organizations that do not have a genuine need for it, or using private information for something other than the original purpose could be considered intrusive.

Keywords

Personal Data Privacy Protection Personal Privacy American Hospital Association International Business Machine 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. American Hospital Association. 1976. A patient’s bill of rights. Nursing Outlook 24(1): 29.Google Scholar
  2. Canadian Organization for the Advancement of Computers in Health (COACH). 1979. Guidelines to Promote the Confidentiality and Security of Automated Health Records Edmonton, Canada: COACH.Google Scholar
  3. Covvey, H. D. 1981. The recommendations of a Canadian Royal Commission relating to computer—based health record keeping. Proceedings, The Fifth Annual Symposium on Computer Applications in Medical Care. Washington, D.C. (November).Google Scholar
  4. Creighton, H. 1978. Diminishing right of privacy: Computerized medical records. Supervisor Nurse (February): 58–61.Google Scholar
  5. Dotto, L. 1980 “Ethics float in muddy waters” Computer Data 39: 41–43.Google Scholar
  6. Hiller, M., and Beyda, V. 1981. Computers, medical records and the right to privacy. Journal of Health, Policy and Law 6(3): 463–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. International Business Machines (IBM) Corp. 1974. Data Scrutiny and Data Processing, vol. 1, Introduction and Overview New York: IBM.Google Scholar
  8. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). 1979. Draft Recommendations of the Council concerning Guidelines Governing the Protection of Privacy and Transborder Flows of Personal Data Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  9. Privacy Protection Study Commission. 1977. Personal Privacy in an Information Society Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  10. Royal Canadian Mounted Police. 1979. “Security in the EDT environment.” Security Information Publications (January).Google Scholar
  11. Westin, A. 1976. Computers, Health Records, and Citizen Rights Washington, D.C: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  12. Westin, A. 1979. The impact of computers on privacy. Datamation, 25 (12): 190, 192–194.Google Scholar
  13. Whieldon, D. 1979. “How much will privacy cost?” Computer Decisions (August): 54–56.Google Scholar

Bibliography

  1. Bakker, A.R. & Scholes, M. (1988). Data protection and nursing: A technical and organizational challenge. In Daly, N. & Hannah, K.J.(eds.). Proceedings of Nursing and Computers: Third International Symposium on Nursing Use of Computers and Information Science Toronto: The C.V. Mosby Company, 94–102.Google Scholar
  2. Gruending, D.L. & MacKay, D.C. (1988). The computerized patient record: Legal, ethical and confidentiality issues. In Daly, N. & Hannah, K.J. (eds.). Proceedings of Nursing and Computers: Third International Symposium on Nursing Use of Computers and Information Science Toronto: The C.V. Mosby Company, 343–352.Google Scholar
  3. Huesing, S. (1983). Security and confidentiality are everyone’s business. Dimensions in Health Service May; 60(5): 26.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Iversen, I. (1988). Data protection as to medical records and nursing care plans. In Daly, N. & Hannah, K.J. (eds.). Proceedings of Nursing and Computers: Third International Symposium on Nursing Use of Computers and Information Science Toronto: The C.V. Mosby Company, 14–16.Google Scholar
  5. Peterson, H.E. & Gerdin Jelger, U. (1988). Patient and staff integrity in a computerized environment. In Daly, N. & Hannah, K.J. (eds.). Proceedings of Nursing and Computers: Third International Symposium on Nursing Use of Computers and Information Science Toronto: The C.V.Mosby Company, 726–729.Google Scholar
  6. Pluyter-Wenting, E.S.P., Bakker, A.R. & Louwerse, C.P. (1991). Data protection in nursing informatics: Balancing privacy aspects and shared use. In Hovenga, E.J.S., Hannah, K.J., McCormick, K.A., & Ronald, J.S. (eds.). Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Nursing Use of Computers and Information Science New York: Springer-Verlag, 68–76.Google Scholar
  7. Romano, C.A. (1987). Privacy, confidentiality, and security of computerized systems: The nursing responsibility May-June; 5(3): 99–104.Google Scholar
  8. Simpson, R..L. (1991). Securing your system from hackers and other hazards. Nursing Management March; 22(3): 25–26.Google Scholar
  9. Vandermeulen, H. (1988). Data protection. In Daly, N. & Hannah, K.J. (eds.). Proceedings of Nursing and Computers: Third International Symposium on Nursing Use of Computers and Information Science Toronto: The C.V. Mosby Company, 2–13.Google Scholar
  10. Wolfe, K. (1990). Confidentiality and common sense. AAOHN Journal July; 38(7): 338–340.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kathryn J. Hannah
    • 1
  • Marion J. Ball
    • 2
  • Margaret J. A. Edwards
    • 3
  1. 1.Information Management Consulting Branch, Information Technology DivisionAlberta HealthEdmontonCanada
  2. 2.Information ServicesUniversity of MarylandBaltimoreUSA
  3. 3.Margaret J. A. Edwards and Associates Inc.CalgaryCanada

Personalised recommendations