Dataset Information

Six dilemmas for stakeholders inherently affecting data sharing during a zoonotic (re-)emerging infectious disease outbreak response.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Timely access to outbreak related data, particularly in the early events of a spillover, is important to support evidence based control measures in response to outbreaks of zoonotic Emerging Infectious Diseases (EID). Yet, this is impeded by several barriers that need to be understood to promote timely sharing of data. Using the MERS epidemic as a model for a zoonotic EID outbreak, this study sought to provide an in-depth understanding of data sharing practices.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews with 25 experts were conducted, along with Focus Group Discussions with 15 additional experts. A root-cause analysis was performed to examine the causal relationships between barriers. Enablers were mapped to the root-cause analysis to understand their influence on the barriers. Finally, root causes were placed in context of core dilemmas identified from the qualitative analysis.

Findings

Eight barriers to data sharing were identified, related to collaboration, technical preparedness, regulations, and (conflict of) interests, and placed in the context of six dilemmas inherent to the multi-stakeholder collaboration required for a zoonotic outbreak response. Fourteen identified enablers showed the willingness of stakeholders to overcome or circumvent these barriers, but also indicated the inherent trial and error nature of implementing such enablers.

Interpretation

Addressing the barriers requires solutions that must consider the complexity and interconnectedness of the root causes underlying them, and should consider the distinct scopes and interests of the different stakeholders. Insights provided by this study can be used to encourage data sharing practices for future outbreaks FUNDING: Wellcome Trust and UK Aid; EU-H2020 Societal Challenges (grant agreement no. 643476), Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (VI.Veni.201S.044).

SUBMITTER: van Roode MY

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10863217 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Six dilemmas for stakeholders inherently affecting data sharing during a zoonotic (re-)emerging infectious disease outbreak response.

van Roode Martine Y MY Dos S Ribeiro Carolina C Farag Elmoubasher E Nour Mohamed M Moustafa Aya A Ahmed Minahil M Haringhuizen George G Koopmans Marion P G MPG van de Burgwal Linda H M LHM

BMC infectious diseases 20240212 1

<h4>Background</h4>Timely access to outbreak related data, particularly in the early events of a spillover, is important to support evidence based control measures in response to outbreaks of zoonotic Emerging Infectious Diseases (EID). Yet, this is impeded by several barriers that need to be understood to promote timely sharing of data. Using the MERS epidemic as a model for a zoonotic EID outbreak, this study sought to provide an in-depth understanding of data sharing practices.<h4>Methods</h4 ...[more]

PMID: 38347527

Similar Datasets

Project description:The rapid advancement of digital health technologies has heightened demand for health data for secondary uses, highlighting the importance of understanding global perspectives on personal information sharing. This article examines stakeholder perceptions and attitudes toward the use of personal health data to improve personalized treatments, interventions, and research. It also identifies barriers and facilitators in health data sharing and pinpoints gaps in current research, aiming to inform ethical practices in healthcare settings that utilize digital technologies. We conducted a scoping review of peer reviewed empirical studies based on data pertaining to perceptions and attitudes towards sharing personal health data. The authors searched three electronic databases-Embase, MEDLINE, and Web of Science-for articles published (2015-2023), using terms relating to health data and perceptions. Thirty-nine articles met the inclusion criteria with sample size ranging from 14 to 29,275. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines for the design and analysis of this study. We synthesized the included articles using narrative analysis. The review captured multiple stakeholder perspectives with an up-to-date range of diverse barriers and facilitators that impact data-sharing behavior. The included studies were primarily cross-sectional and geographically concentrated in high-income settings; often overlooking diverse demographics and broader global health challenges. Most of the included studies were based within North America and Western Europe, with the United States (n = 8) and the United Kingdom (n = 7) representing the most studied countries. Many reviewed studies were published in 2022 (n = 11) and used quantitative methods (n = 23). Twenty-nine studies examined the perspectives of patients and the public while six looked at healthcare professionals, researchers, and experts. Many of the studies we reviewed reported overall positive attitudes about data sharing with variations around sociodemographic factors, motivations for sharing data, type and recipient of data being shared, consent preference, and trust.

Project description:Introduction: Health research is gradually embracing a more collectivist approach, fueled by a new movement of open science, data sharing and collaborative partnerships. However, the existence of systemic contradictions hinders the sharing of health data and such collectivist endeavor. Therefore, this qualitative study explores these systemic barriers to a fair sharing of health data from the perspectives of Swiss stakeholders. Methods: Purposive and snowball sampling were used to recruit 48 experts active in the Swiss healthcare domain, from the research/policy-making field and those having a high position in a health data enterprise (e.g., health register, hospital IT data infrastructure or a national health data initiative). Semi-structured interviews were then conducted, audio-recorded, verbatim transcribed with identifying information removed to guarantee the anonymity of participants. A theoretical thematic analysis was then carried out to identify themes and subthemes related to the topic of systemic fairness for sharing health data. Results: Two themes related to the topic of systemic fairness for sharing health data were identified, namely (i) the hypercompetitive environment and (ii) the legal uncertainty blocking data sharing. The theme, hypercompetitive environment was further divided into two subthemes, (i) systemic contradictions to fair data sharing and the (ii) need of fair systemic attribution mechanisms. Discussion: From the perspectives of Swiss stakeholders, hypercompetition in the Swiss academic system is hindering the sharing of health data for secondary research purposes, with the downside effect of influencing researchers to embrace individualism for career opportunities, thereby opposing the data sharing movement. In addition, there was a perceived sense of legal uncertainty from legislations governing the sharing of health data, which adds unreasonable burdens on individual researchers, who are often unequipped to deal with such facets of their data sharing activities.

Project description:BackgroundGenetic information of pathogens is an essential input for infectious disease control, public health and for research. Efficiency in preventing and responding to global outbreaks relies on timely access to such information. Still, ownership barriers stand in the way of timely sharing of genetic data from pathogens, frustrating efficient public health responses and ultimately the potential use of such resources in innovations. Under a One Health approach, stakeholders, their interests and ownership issues are manifold and need to be investigated. We interviewed key actors from governmental and non-governmental bodies to identify overlapping and conflicting interests, and the overall challenges for sharing pathogen data, to provide essential inputs to the further development of political and practical strategies for improved data sharing practices.Methods & findingsTo identify and prioritize barriers, 52 Key Opinion Leaders were interviewed. A root-cause analysis was performed to identify causal relations between barriers. Finally, barriers were mapped to the innovation cycle reflecting how they affect the range of surveillance, innovation, and sharing activities. Four main barrier categories were found: compliance to regulations, negative consequences, self-interest, and insufficient incentives for compliance. When grouped in sectors (research institutes, public health organizations, supra-national organizations and industry) stakeholders appear to have similar interests, more than when grouped in domains (human, veterinary and food). Considering the innovation process, most of barriers could be mapped to the initial stages of the innovation cycle as sampling and sequencing phases. These are stages of primary importance to outbreak control and public health response. A minority of barriers applied to later stages in the innovation cycle, which are of more importance to product development.ConclusionOverall, barriers are complex and entangled, due to the diversity of causal factors and their crosscutting features. Therefore, barriers must be addressed in a comprehensive and integrated manner. Stakeholders have different interests highlighting the diversity in motivations for sharing pathogen data: prioritization of public health, basic research, economic welfare and/or innovative capacity. Broad inter-sectorial discussions should start with the alignment of these interests within sectors. The improved sharing of pathogen data, especially in upstream phases of the innovation process, will generate substantial public health benefits through increased availability of data to inform surveillance systems, as well as to allow the (re-)use of data for the development of medical countermeasures to control infectious diseases.

Project description:BackgroundThe meaningful sharing of health data between different stakeholders is central to the advancement of science and to improve care offered to individual patients. However, it is important that the interests of individual stakeholders involved in this data sharing ecosystem are taken into account to ensure fair data sharing practices. In this regard, this qualitative study investigates such practices from the perspectives of a subset of relevant Swiss expert stakeholders, using a distributive justice lens.MethodsUsing purposive and snowball sampling methodologies, 48 expert stakeholders from the Swiss healthcare and research domains were recruited for semi-structured interviews. After the experts had consented, the interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim, but omitting identifying information to ensure confidentiality and anonymity. A thematic analysis using a deductive approach was conducted to identify fair data sharing practices for secondary research purposes. Themes and subthemes were then identified and developed during the analysis.ResultsThree distributive justice themes were identified in the data sharing negotiation processes, and these are: (i) effort, which was subcategorized into two subthemes (i.e. a claim to data reciprocity and other reciprocal advantages, and a claim to transparency on data re-use), (ii) compensation, which was subcategorized into two subthemes (i.e. a claim to an academic compensation and a claim to a financial compensation), and lastly, (iii) contribution, i.e. the significance of data contributions should be matched with a corresponding reward.ConclusionsThis qualitative study provides insights, which could inform policy-making on claims and incentives that encourage Swiss expert stakeholders to share their datasets. Importantly, several claims have been identified and justified under the basis of distributive justice principles, whilst some are more debatable and likely insufficient in justifying data sharing activities. Nonetheless, these claims should be taken seriously and discussed more broadly. Indeed, promoting health research while ensuring that healthcare systems guarantee better services, it is paramount to ensure that solutions developed are sustainable, provide fair criteria for academic careers and promote the sharing of high quality data to advance science.

Project description:BackgroundThe zoonotic infectious diseases of poverty (zIDPs) are a group of diseases contributing to global poverty, with significant impacts on a substantial population. This study aims to describe the global, regional, and national burden of zIDPs-schistosomiasis, cystic echinococcosis, cysticercosis, and food-borne trematodiases (FBTs)-to support policy making and resource allocation for their control and elimination.MethodsData of zIDPs from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2021 were retrieved from 1990 to 2021. The age-standardized prevalence rate (ASPR), age-standardized mortality rate (ASMR), and age-standardized disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) rate were described and the estimated annual percentage changes (EAPCs) were calculated to quantify their burden and temporal trends. Spearman correlation analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between age-standardized rates and Socio-demographic Index (SDI).ResultsIn 2021, these zIDPs exhibited a certain level of ASPRs and age-standardized DALY rates, while maintaining relatively low ASMRs. Noticeably, schistosomiasis presented the highest ASPR of 1914.299 (95% UI: 1378.920, 2510.853 per 100,000 population) and an age-standardized DALY rate of 21.895 (95% UI: 12.937, 37.278 per 100,000 population) among the zIDPs. The tapestry of burden-woven predominantly through low and lower-middle SDI regions-stretched across Africa, Latin America, and parts of Asia. From 1990 to 2021, a kaleidoscopic shift was observed globally as ASPRs, ASMRs, and age-standardized DALY rates declined significantly, as reflected by the EAPC values. Negative correlations were observed between the ASPRs, ASMRs, age-standardized DALY rates of schistosomiasis (r value = - 0.610, - 0.622 and - 0.610), cystic echinococcosis (- 0.676 of ASMR, - 0.550 of age-standardized DALYs), cysticercosis (- 0.420, - 0.797 and - 0.591) and the SDI. In contrast, a slight positive correlation was noted between the ASPR, age-standardized DALY rates of FBTs and SDI with r value of 0.221 and 0.213, respectively.ConclusionThe burden of zIDPs declined across almost all endemic regions from 1990 to 2021, yet still predominated in low and low-middle SDI regions. Substantial challenges exist to achieve the goal of control and elimination of zIDPs, and integrated approaches based on One Health need to be strengthened to improve health outcomes.

Dataset Information

Six dilemmas for stakeholders inherently affecting data sharing during a zoonotic (re-)emerging infectious disease outbreak response.

Background

Methods

Findings

Interpretation

Publications

Six dilemmas for stakeholders inherently affecting data sharing during a zoonotic (re-)emerging infectious disease outbreak response.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets