TY - JOUR T1 - Public opinion on sharing data from UK health services for clinical and research purposes without explicit consent JF - medRxiv DO - 10.1101/2021.07.19.21260635 SP - 2021.07.19.21260635 AU - Linda A. Jones AU - Jenny R. Nelder AU - Joseph M. Fryer AU - Philip H. Alsop AU - Michael R. Geary AU - Mark Prince AU - Rudolf N. Cardinal Y1 - 2021/01/01 UR - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/07/19/2021.07.19.21260635.abstract N2 - BACKGROUND In the UK, National Health Service (NHS/HSC) data is variably shared between healthcare organizations for direct care, and increasingly used in de-identified forms for research. Few large-scale studies have examined public opinion on sharing, including the treatment of mental health (MH) versus physical health (PH) data.METHODS Pre-registered anonymous online survey open to all UK residents, recruiting Feb–Sep 2020. Participants were randomized to one of three framing statements regarding MH versus PH data.FINDINGS Participants numbered 29275; 40% had experienced a MH condition. A majority supported identifiable data sharing for direct clinical care without explicit consent, but 20% opposed this. Preference for clinical/identifiable sharing decreased with distance and was slightly less for MH than PH data, with a small framing effect. Preference for research/de-identified data sharing without explicit consent showed the same small PH/MH and framing effects, plus greater preference for sharing structured data than de-identified free text. There was net support for research sharing to the NHS, academic institutions, and national research charities, net ambivalence about sharing to profit-making companies researching treatments, and net opposition to sharing to other companies (similar to sharing publicly). De-identified linkage to non-health data was generally supported, except to data held by private companies. We report demographic influences on preference. A clear majority supported a single NHS mechanism to choose uses of their data. Support for data sharing increased during the pandemic.INTERPRETATION Support for healthcare data sharing for direct care without explicit consent is broad but not universal. There is net support for the sharing of de-identified data for research to the NHS, academia, and the charitable sector, but not the commercial sector. A single national NHS-hosted system for patients to control the use of their NHS data for clinical purposes and for research would have broad public support.FUNDING MRC.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical TrialISRCTN37444142Clinical Protocols https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN37444142 Funding StatementSupported by the UK Medical Research Council (Mental Health Data Pathfinder award MC_PC_17213 to RNC). Recruitment was supported by the NIHR CRN and the REDCap installation was supported in part by the NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre (BRC-1215-20014); the views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, or the Department of Health and Social Care.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:NHS Research Ethics/Health Research Authority (HRA) approval (Integrated Research Application System identifier [ID] 268811, East of Scotland Research Ethics Service, Research Ethics Committee reference 19/ES/0144).All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesFull anonymous data set to be made available (with participant consent) from the University of Cambridge Data Repository -- URL to be established. ER -