Skip to main content
Canadian Journal of Public Health = Revue Canadienne de Santé Publique logoLink to Canadian Journal of Public Health = Revue Canadienne de Santé Publique
. 2005 Mar 1;96(2):151–154. doi: 10.1007/BF03403680

Linking Survey Data with Administrative Health Information

Characteristics Associated with Consent from a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit Follow-up Study

Anne F Klassen 115,, Shoo K Lee 215, Morris Barer 315, Parminder Raina 415
PMCID: PMC6975643  PMID: 15850038

Abstract

Background

Health services and population health research often depends on the ready availability of administrative health data. However, the linkage of survey-based data to administrative data for health research purposes has raised concerns about privacy. Our aim was to compare consent rates to data linkage in two samples of caregivers and describe characteristics associated with consenters.

Methods

Subjects included caregivers of children admitted at birth to neonatal intensive care units (NICU) in British Columbia and caregivers of a sample of healthy children. Caregivers were asked to sign a consent form enabling researchers to link the survey information with theirs and their child’s provincially collected health records. Bivariate analysis identified sample characteristics associated with consent. These were entered into logistic regression models.

Results

The sample included 1,140 of 2,221 NICU children and 393 of 718 healthy children. The overall response rate was 55% and the response rate for located families was 67.1%. Consent to data linkage with the child data was given by 71.6% of respondents and with caregiver data by 67% of respondents. Families of healthy children were as likely to provide consent as families of NICU children. Higher rates of consent were associated with being a biological parent, not requiring survey reminders, involvement in a parent support group, not working full-time, having less healthy children, multiple births and higher income.

Conclusion

The level of consent achieved suggests that when given a choice, most people are willing to permit researcher access to their personal health information for research purposes. There is scope for educating the public about the nature and importance of research that combines survey and administrative data to address important health questions.

MeSH terms: Privacy, databases, questionnaires, neonatalogy

References

  • 1.Jacomb PA, Jorm AF, Korten AE, Rodgers B, Henderson S, Christensen H. GP attendance by elderly Australians: Evidence for unmet need in elderly men. Med J Aust. 1997;166:123–26. doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.1997.tb140040.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Lillard LA, Farmer MM. Linking Medicare and national survey data. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127:691–95. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-127-8_Part_2-199710151-00051. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Rhodes AE, Lin E, Mustard CA. Self-reported use of mental health services versus administrative records: Should we care? Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2002;11:125–33. doi: 10.1002/mpr.130. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Finkelstein MM. Do factors other than need determine utilization of physician’s services in Ontario? CMAJ. 2001;165:565–70. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Young AF, Dobson AJ, Byles JE. Health services research using linked records: Who consents and what is the gain? Aust N Z J Public Health. 2001;25:417–20. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-842X.2001.tb00284.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Chamberlayne R, Green B, Barer ML, Hertzman C, Lawrence WJ, Sheps SB. Creating a population-based linked health database: A new resource for health services research. Can J Public Health. 1998;89:270–73. doi: 10.1007/BF03403934. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Ware JE, Kosinski M. SF-36 Physical & Mental Health Summary Scales: A Manual for Users of Version 1. Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric; 2001. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Ware JE, Snow KK, Kosinski M. SF-36 Health Survey: Manual and Interpretation Guide. Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric Incorporated; 2000. [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Byles J, Byrne C, Boyle MH, Offord DR. Ontario Child Health Study: Reliability and validity of the general functioning subscale of the McMaster Family Assessment Device. Fam Process. 1988;27:97–104. doi: 10.1111/j.1545-5300.1988.00097.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Saigal S, Stoskopf BL, Rosenbaum PL, Hoult LA, Furlong W, Feeny DH. Development of a multiattribute preschool health status classification system. Pediatric Res. 1998;43:228A. [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Achenbach TM, Rescorla LA. Manual for the ASEBA Preschool Forms and Profiles. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont Department of Psychiatry; 2000. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Asch DA, Jedrziewski MK, Christakis NA. Response rates to mail surveys published in medical journals. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997;50:1129–36. doi: 10.1016/S0895-4356(97)00126-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Al-Shahi R, Warlow C. Using patient-identified data for observational research and audit. BMJ. 2000;321:1031–32. doi: 10.1136/bmj.321.7268.1031. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Canadian Journal of Public Health = Revue Canadienne de Santé Publique are provided here courtesy of Springer

RESOURCES