Methods Inf Med 2010; 49(06): 601-607
DOI: 10.3414/ME09-02-0058
Special Topic – Original Articles
Schattauer GmbH

A Data Protection Scheme for Medical Research Networks

Review after Five Years of Operation
K. Helbing
1   Department of Medical Informatics, University Medical Center, Georg-August-University, Goettingen, Germany
,
S. Y. Demiroglu
1   Department of Medical Informatics, University Medical Center, Georg-August-University, Goettingen, Germany
,
F. Rakebrandt
1   Department of Medical Informatics, University Medical Center, Georg-August-University, Goettingen, Germany
,
K. Pommerening
2   Institute for Medical Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Informatics, University Medical Center, Johannes-Gutenberg-University, Mainz, Germany
,
O. Rienhoff
1   Department of Medical Informatics, University Medical Center, Georg-August-University, Goettingen, Germany
,
U. Sax
1   Department of Medical Informatics, University Medical Center, Georg-August-University, Goettingen, Germany
3   Information Technology, University Medical Center, Georg-August-University, Goettingen, Germany
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Received: 14 December 2009

accepted: 30 April 2010

Publication Date:
18 January 2018 (online)

Summary

Background: The data protection requirements matured in parallel to new clinical tests generating more personal data since the 1960s. About ten years ago it was recognized that a generic data protection scheme for medical research networks is required, which reinforces patient rights but also allows economically feasible medical research compared to “hand-carved” individual solutions.

Objectives: To give recommendations for more efficient IT infrastructures for medical research networks in compliance with data protection requirements.

Methods: The IT infrastructures of three medical research networks were reviewed with respect to the relevant data management modules. Recommendations are derived to increase cost efficiency in research networks assessing the consequences of a service provider approach without lowering the data protection level.

Results: The existing data protection schemes are very complex. Smaller research networks cannot afford the implementation of such schemes. Larger networks struggle to keep them sustainable. Due to a modular redesign in the medical research network community, a new approach offers opportunities for an efficient sustainable IT infrastructure involving a service provider concept. For standard components 70–80% of the costs could be cut down, for open source components about 37% over a three-year period.

Conclusions: Future research networks should switch to a service-oriented approach to achieve a sustainable, cost-efficient IT infrastructure.

 
  • References

  • 1 Rienhoff O. Zur Beurteilung der “Richtigkeit” patientenbezogener Daten in der medizinischen Dokumentation. In: Reichertz PL, Kilian W. editors. Arztgeheimnis – Datenbanken – Datenschutz. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 1982. pp 196-203.
  • 2 Murphy SN, Mendis M, Hackett K, Kuttan R, Pan W, Phillips LC. et al. Architecture of the open-source clinical research chart from Informatics for Integrating Biology and the Bedside. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2007; pp 548-552.
  • 3 Langella S, Oster S, Hastings S, Siebenlist F, Phillips J, Ervin D. et al. The Cancer Biomedical Informatics Grid (caBIG) Security Infrastructure. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2007; pp 433-437.
  • 4 Manion FJ, Robbins RJ, Weems WA, Crowley RS. Security and privacy requirements for a multi-institutional cancer research data grid: an interview-based study. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2009; 9: 31.
  • 5 Lun KC. Challenges in medical informatics: perspectives of an international medical informatics organization. Methods Inf Med 2002; 41 (Suppl. 01) 60-63.
  • 6 Duftschmid G, Wrba T, Gall W, Dorda W. The strategic approach of managing healthcare data exchange in Austria. Methods Inf Med 2004; 43 (Suppl. 02) 124-132.
  • 7 Pommerening K, Sax U, Müller T, Speer R, Ganslandt T, Drepper J. et al. Integrating eHealth and Medical Research: The TMF Data Protection Scheme. In: Blobel B, Pharow P, Zvarova J, Lopez D. editors. eHealth: Combining Health Telematics, Telemedicine, Biomedical Engineering and Bioinformatics to the Edge. Berlin: Akademische Verlagsgesellschaft Aka GmbH; 2008. pp 5-10.
  • 8 Kalra D, Singleton P, Milan J, Mackay J, Detmer D, Rector A. et al. Security and confidentiality approach for the Clinical E-Science Framework (CLEF). Methods Inf Med 2005; 44 (Suppl. 02) 193-197.
  • 9 Reng C, Debold P, Specker C, Pommerening K. Generische Lösungen zum Datenschutz für die Forschungsnetze in der Medizin. Berlin: Medizinisch Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft; 2006
  • 10 Garman KS, Acharya CR, Edelman E, Grade M, Gaedcke J, Sud S. et al. A genomic approach to colon cancer risk stratification yields biologic insights into therapeutic opportunities. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2008; 105 (49) 19432-19437.
  • 11 Ghadimi BM, Grade M, Difilippantonio MJ, Varma S, Simon R, Montagna C. et al. Effectiveness of gene expression profiling for response prediction of rectal adenocarcinomas to preoperative chemoradiotherapy. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23 (Suppl. 09) 1826-1838.
  • 12 Simon JW, Paslack R, Robienski J, Goebel JW, Krawczak M. Biomaterialbanken – Rechtliche Rahmenbedingungen. Berlin: Medizinisch Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft; 2006
  • 13 Simon J, Paslack R, Robienski J, Cooper DN, Goebel JW, Krawczak M. A legal framework for biobanking: the German experience. European Journal of Human Genetics 2007; 15 (Suppl. 05) 528-532.
  • 14 Kiehntopf M, Böer K. Biomaterialbanken – Checkliste zur Qualitätssicherung. Berlin: Medizinisch Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft; 2008
  • 15 Faldum A, Pommerening K. An optimal code for patient identifiers. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 2005; 79 (Suppl. 01) 81-88.