Science
Conference

DATA PROTECTION CHALLENGES IN DIGITAL HEALTH RECORDS: LEGAL AND CONTRACTUAL PERSPECTIVES

Otaboy Yashnarbekov

Science-Conference.com
Volume: 1
Issue: 1
Date: October 19, 2024
Download PDF

Abstract

The digitization of health records has revolutionized healthcare delivery, offering improved efficiency, accessibility, and data analysis capabilities. However, this transformation has also introduced significant data protection challenges. This study examines the legal and contractual perspectives surrounding data protection in digital health records. Through a comprehensive literature review and analysis of relevant laws, regulations, and contractual frameworks, we identify key challenges including privacy breaches, unauthorized access, data ownership disputes, and cross-border data transfers. The research highlights the need for robust legal frameworks, enhanced contractual agreements, and technological safeguards to protect sensitive health information in the digital age. Recommendations for policymakers, healthcare providers, and technology developers are provided to address these challenges and ensure the secure and ethical management of digital health records.

Keywords

Digital health records, data protection, legal frameworks, contractual agreements, privacy breaches, interoperability, consent models, cross-border data transfers.

References

Australian Government. (2020). Privacy Act 1988. Federal Register of Legislation. https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2020C00237 Attard, J., Brennan, R., Camilleri, N., & Mayer, W. (2020). Regulatory sandboxes for data protection. Computer Law & Security Review, 36, 105397. Aziz, M. M. A., Sadat, M. N., Alhadidi, D., Wang, S., Jiang, X., Brown, C. L., & Mohammed, N. (2021). Privacy-preserving techniques of genomic data—a survey. Briefings in Bioinformatics, 22(5), bbaa051. Bacher, K., Frey, S., Krämer, N., & Rauh, C. (2021). Interoperability and data protection requirements in digital health care: A systematic review. Health Policy and Technology, 10(1), 37-45. Bai, G., Jiang, J. X., & Flasher, R. (2020). Hospital risk of data breaches. JAMA Internal Medicine, 180(6), 855-858. Budin-Ljøsne, I., Teare, H. J., Kaye, J., Beck, S., Bentzen, H. B., Caenazzo, L., … & Mascalzoni, D. (2017). Dynamic consent: a potential solution to some of the challenges of modern biomedical research. BMC Medical Ethics, 18(1), 4. California State Legislature. (2018). California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018. California Legislative Information. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180AB375 Court of Justice of the European Union. (2020). Judgment in Case C-311/18 Data Protection Commissioner v Facebook Ireland and Maximillian Schrems. CURIA. https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2020-07/cp200091en.pdf Ehrenhard, M., Wijnhoven, F., van den Broek, T., & Stagno, M. Z. (2021). Unlocking how start-ups create business value with mobile applications: Development of an App-enabled Business Innovation Cycle. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 166, 120515. European Commission. (2019). Ethics guidelines for trustworthy AI. https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/ethics-guidelines-trustworthy-ai European Data Protection Board. (2020). Guidelines 05/2020 on consent under Regulation 2016/679. https://edpb.europa.eu/sites/edpb/files/files/file1/edpb_guidelines_202005_consent_en.pdf Evans, B. J. (2012). Much ado about data ownership. Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, 25(1), 69-130. Fernández-Alemán, J. L., Señor, I. C., Lozoya, P. Á. O., & Toval, A. (2013). Security and privacy in electronic health records: A systematic literature review. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 46(3), 541-562. Abdikhakimov, I. (2024). Quantum Computing Regulation: a Global Perspective on Balancing Innovation and Security. Journal of Intellectual Property and Human Rights, 3(8), 95-108. Finck, M., & Pallas, F. (2020). They who must not be identified—distinguishing personal from non-personal data under the GDPR. International Data Privacy Law, 10(1), 11-36. Global Digital Health Partnership. (2021). About GDHP. https://www.gdhp.org/about-us Gostin, L. O., Halabi, S. F., & Wilson, K. (2018). Health data and privacy in the digital era. JAMA, 320(3), 233-234. Abdikhakimov, I. (2024). QUANTUM SUPREMACY AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR BLOCKCHAIN REGULATION AND LEGISLATION. Oriental renaissance: Innovative, educational, natural and social sciences, 4(1), 249-254. IEEE. (2019). Ethically Aligned Design: A Vision for Prioritizing Human Well-being with Autonomous and Intelligent Systems. https://standards.ieee.org/content/ieee-standards/en/industry-connections/ec/autonomous-systems.html IMDRF. (2020). Software as a Medical Device (SaMD): Key Definitions. http://www.imdrf.org/docs/imdrf/final/technical/imdrf-tech-131209-samd-key-definitions-140901.pdf Kaplan, B. (2019). Revisiting health information technology ethical, legal, and social issues and evaluation: telehealth/telemedicine and COVID-19. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 143, 104239. Kaye, J., Whitley, E. A., Lund, D., Morrison, M., Teare, H., & Melham, K. (2015). Dynamic consent: a patient interface for twenty-first century research networks. European Journal of Human Genetics, 23(2), 141-146. Abdikhakimov, I. (2023). Jurisdiction over Transnational Quantum Networks. International Journal of Law and Policy, 1(8).