Views on sharing mental health data for research purposes: A qualitative study with people with mental illness
Watson, E.; Fletcher-Watson, S.; Kirkham, E. J.
Show abstract
BackgroundImproved data sharing could have extensive benefits for mental health research and treatment. However, it is vital that data are shared in a way that aligns with the views of people with mental health conditions. Whilst previous research has examined public views of health data sharing, few studies have focused specifically on people with mental illness. MethodsSemi-structured online interviews were conducted with twelve people with a range mental health conditions, including schizophrenia, anxiety, depression, eating disorder and addiction. Interview questions focussed on the risks and benefits of sharing mental health data, how data should be kept safe, and the sensitivity of different types of data. ResultsThe overarching themes identified were: benefits of sharing mental health data, concerns about sharing mental health data, safeguards, and data types. There was a high level of support for the use of data sharing to facilitate improved knowledge of and treatment for mental health conditions. Concerns included the potential for misuse of data, such as by insurance companies or employers, and the risk of mental health stigma from researchers and healthcare professionals who accessed the data. There was a focus on appropriate safeguards, such as secure storage access procedures. ConclusionsThere was a strong sense across participants that more should be done to combat the suffering caused by mental illness, and that appropriate health data sharing could facilitate this. The mental health research community could build on this generally positive attitude to mental health data sharing by ensuring that they follow rigorous best practice which accounts for the specific concerns of people with mental illness.
Matching journals
The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Co-development of a best practice checklist for mental health data science: A Delphi study 96%
- Business as Un-usual: Access to mental health and primary care services for people with severe mental illness during the COVID-19 restrictions 95%
- Priorities for Future Research about Screen Use and Adolescent Mental Health: A Participatory Prioritization Study 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- ‘I had no life. I was only existing’ . Factors shaping the mental health and wellbeing of people experiencing long Covid: a qualitative study 92%
- One year later: Tracking the continued growth of mental illness stigma in England 92%
- Effectiveness, acceptability and potential harms of peer support for self-harm in non-clinical settings: A systematic review 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- ‘Beyond Places of Safety’ – a qualitative study exploring the implementation of mental health crisis care innovations across England 93%
- A qualitative investigation of crisis cafés in England: their role, implementation, and accessibility 93%
- Implementation strategies for telemental health: a systematic review 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Service user experiences and views regarding telemental health during the COVID-19 pandemic: a co-produced framework analysis 94%
- Public perceptions of non-adherence to COVID-19 measures by self and others in the United Kingdom 94%
- The Benefits and Harms of Open Notes in Mental Health: A Delphi Survey of International Experts 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- The psychosocial impact on frontline health and social care professionals in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative interview study 93%
- Ethnicity and COVID-19 outcomes among healthcare workers in the United Kingdom: UK-REACH ethico-legal research, qualitative research on healthcare workers’ experiences, and stakeholder engagement protocol 92%
- Adverse event reviews in healthcare: What matters to patients and their family? A qualitative study exploring the perspective of patients and family 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.