1 |
Informed consent and the default ‘opt-in’ |
1 |
Opt-out versus opt-in |
2 |
Informed consent |
3 |
Patient access to GP records |
4 |
Apathy regarding default ‘opt-in’ |
2 |
Trust |
5 |
Lack of trust |
3 |
Privacy and data security |
6 |
Identifiable data |
7 |
Privacy |
8 |
Security issues |
9 |
Confidentiality of patient data |
10 |
care.data has risks |
4 |
Involvement of private companies |
11 |
Data accessed by insurance companies |
12 |
Data for sale |
13 |
Concerns about the involvement of a private IT company |
14 |
Data going to other private companies |
15 |
Care.data linked to NHS privatisation |
5 |
Legal issues and GPs’ concerns |
16 |
Data protection |
17 |
Legal issues |
18 |
GPs' concerns |
19 |
Concerns about adding genomic data later |
20 |
Police access to care.data |
6 |
Communication failure and confusion about care.data |
21 |
Communication failure |
22 |
Confusion about what care.data is |
23 |
care.data as a media event |
24 |
care.data leaflet and junk mail |
25 |
Conflicts of interest |
26 |
Public ignorance about care.data |
27 |
Mainstream media reports on care.data |
28 |
PR and presentation of facts |
29 |
Critics accused of scaremongering |
7 |
Delayed implementation |
30 |
Delay to implementation |
31 |
Role of activists or activism |
32 |
Flawed project |
33 |
Change management |
34 |
Another NHS fiasco |
35 |
Pause will not affect implementation |
36 |
A failed brand |
37 |
Costs of care.data project |
38 |
Technological problems |
39 |
Accuracy of medical records |
8 |
Patient-centeredness |
40 |
Arrogance |
41 |
Lack of patient and public involvement |
42 |
Lack of patient-centeredness |
43 |
Patient ownership of medical data |
44 |
Lack of engagement |
9 |
Potential of care.data and the ideal model of implementation |
45 |
Pro care.data viewpoint |
46 |
Ideal model of implementation |
47 |
Benefits of open data |
48 |
Accusing critics of scaremongering |
49 |
Use of patient data is not new |
50 |
Moral imperative for care.data |