Mortality Data in Healthcare Analytics
|
|
- Lionel Morgan
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Mortality Data in Healthcare Analytics Sourcing Robust Data In a HIPAA-Compliant Manner Executive Summary The incorporation of mortality data into healthcare data sets allows fraud prevention, accurate billing and benefits distribution, and true outcome analysis (especially in fatal disease areas like oncology, where survival is a key endpoint). The net effect of adding mortality data is strengthening identity protection, reducing healthcare costs, and improving health treatments and care delivery. However, most healthcare data streams do not inherently capture mortality, and changes to the Social Security Administration s (SSA) Death Master File (DMF), a leading public data source for mortality records, have dramatically reduced this file s coverage from 2.5 million lives in 2010 to 460,000 lives in This study discusses options for filling the gaps in DMF data coverage, and presents a solution for joining this mortality data to healthcare data sets in a Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA)-compliant manner. Key findings include: Combining obituary data with the DMF data file is a robust method to increase U.S. mortality data coverage; in 2016, obituary data adds 1.7 million unique records not included in the DMF data file. Adding mortality data directly into a healthcare data environment could be considered a HIPAA violation, as mortality data contains numerous fields that are personal health information (PHI) and personally identifiable information (PII), including names, dates of birth, and even social security numbers (from the DMF). Mortality data should be added to healthcare data environments only after performing HIPAAcompliant de-identification, and joining of mortality data to healthcare data should only be performed using encrypted patient tokens to match records, not by using the PHI or PII present in mortality data. The Value of Mortality Data in Healthcare Analyses The value of mortality data in healthcare analysis has long been recognized; over three decades ago, a United Nations report noted the sector in which mortality information is most directly valuable is that of health. 1 Mortality data can be used to identify high-risk patient groups to support the effective reallocation of resources to improve health and health outcomes. Validating patient mortality helps protect patient identity, limits fraud, and ensures accurate billing processes. And in clinical development, measuring mortality provides a vital endpoint for new therapy approval, and the objective data for accurate outcome analysis. The net result for physicians, insurers, drug developers, and health policy makers is improved care, reduced costs and ultimately, more lives saved. Universal Patient Key
2 Despite the value mortality data can bring to healthcare analyses, healthcare data sets often lack mortality data. Healthcare data are gathered as a result of an interaction with a site of care, and deceased patients no longer interact with points of care. For example, healthcare data may be collected in the form of insurance claims following a provider visit or laboratory test, as provider notes entered into an Electronic Medical Record (EMR), or as a prescription filled at a pharmacy. Unless a patient dies during a care interaction (e.g. in the hospital), a death will not be recorded in the healthcare dataset. Mortality Sources: The Social Security Death Master File Historically, healthcare users have filled the gaps in mortality data by incorporating death records from the SSA DMF. The DMF is an index of over 85 million records based on SSA payment records and death reports from family members, funeral homes, financial institutions, postal authorities, states, and other federal agencies, from 1936 to the present. 2,3,4 Each DMF record typically includes the social security number, full name, date of birth, and date of death. The file is updated weekly, making it a highly valuable and timely record of U.S. deaths. While the SSA does not guarantee data completeness or accuracy, the DMF has become an important data source for death verification and fraud protection. Medical researchers rely on the information to track study patients and verify death, while members of financial institutions, insurance companies, and governments rely on the information to verify identity and prevent fraud. In addition, the DMF is a more affordable, easier to use, and timelier source than the National Death Index (NDI) maintained by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), despite the latter being a more complete record of U.S. deaths. The DMF is considered a public file under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and has been made available since 1980; however, access to the dataset is restricted, and is contingent upon both an application and an annual certification. 4 The SSA grants access of the full dataset to approved state and federal agencies, whereas the Department of Commerce s National Technical Information Service (NTIS) sells access to the public file to approved and certified private and public organizations. The DMF Public File: A Diminishing Resource for Mortality Data In 2011, the usefulness of the DMF public file as a comprehensive record of U.S. deaths changed dramatically, when the SSA ceased releasing state-level records as part of the file. For a decade, the DMF included state-reported deaths, but amid rising concerns that the file provided identity thieves easy access to personally identifiable information (PII), the SSA, citing the Social Security Act, determined it had been erroneously disclosing state records. Thus, the SSA removed 4.2 million historical death records, and ceased releasing state-reported death records in subsequent updates. 5 In 2010, the SSA DMF file (with state records) included 2.5 million records 6 ; by 2016, the file included only 460,000 records. Universal Patient Key Page 2
3 The impact of the SSA s decision on the completeness of the DMF data file is clearly illustrated in Figure 1. In 2005, the DMF data file accounted for 90% of the deaths reported by the CDC, whereas in 2016, the DMF data file accounted for a mere 17% of the CDC-reported deaths. The net effect for healthcare data analysts is that the lack of reliable, timely mortality data can lead to billing and benefits errors, slow the collection of data for clinical trials or long-term epidemiological studies, and hamper outcomes analyses. Figure 1. Annual U.S. Deaths ( ): Reported Volume in DMF Data File vs. CDC NDI 90% 82% 72% 62% 59% 55% 51% 50% 45% 41% 33% 17% Note: *CDC NDI values for 2015 and 2016 are estimates. Leveraging U.S. Obituary Data to Increase Mortality Coverage Given the continued decline in DMF coverage, we wanted to understand the extent to which obituary data might increase the mortality coverage beyond that of the DMF data file alone. To do so, we joined obituary data gathered since 2010 to the DMF file, removed any duplicate individuals shared between the two files, and counted the total number of unique records per year. By removing the duplicate records shared between the two files, we were able to assess the true additive effect of the obituary data set. We used the CDC s NDI data as a benchmark for total U.S. deaths in a given year. As shown in Figure 2, adding obituary data to the DMF data file results in a substantial increase in mortality data coverage. In 2016, the inclusion of obituary data added 1.7 million unique mortality records to the 460,000 included in the DMF public file. The combined data, shown in Figure 2, contain total mortality records of nearly 2.2 million individuals for 2016, or 82% of the total estimated lives in the CDC NDI. This study demonstrates that the addition of obituary data to the DMF data file is an effective and robust method of capturing the majority of U.S. mortality records, and is far superior to using the DMF data file alone. Universal Patient Key Page 3
4 Figure 2. Filling the DMF Data Gap with Obituary Data 30,00,000 Number of U.S. Death Records 25,00,000 20,00,000 15,00,000 10,00,000 5,00,000 82% DMF Data File Obituary Data (De-duplicated)** Note: *Percentage shown is the percentage of the total estimated CDC NDI death records in 2016 represented by the combined mortality data set. **Obituary data (De-duplicated): Mortality records present in both the DMF data file and in the Obituary records were removed from the Obituary data. Incorporating Mortality Data in Healthcare Environments: Compliance Considerations Healthcare organizations must abide by the security and privacy regulations set forth in the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) and in the subsequent Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act of To comply with government regulations, all PHI data elements must be removed or the records de-identified, i.e. anonymized, before being incorporated into any other healthcare data set that is intended for use other than direct clinical support. Incorporating mortality data into existing healthcare data sets presents notable security and compliance challenges. Public and privately-available mortality data include a wealth of PHI and PII (e.g. names, addresses, dates of birth and death, social security numbers, etc.); therefore, adding mortality data directly into a healthcare data set could be a HIPAA violation. To be HIPAA-compliant, mortality data should be de-identified before being brought into a healthcare environment. However, straight de-identification presents an obvious challenge: once PHI/PII data elements are removed, users have no way to understand which deceased individuals in the mortality data set match the de-identified individuals in the destination healthcare data set. Universal Patient Key Page 4
5 HIPAA-Compliant De-Identification and Linking of Mortality Data Using Patient Tokens To make our combined mortality data set HIPAA-compliant, we de-identified the records using our UPK Core de-identification software. This software processes the raw data from the de-duplicated DMF and obituary data file, removing names, addresses, and social security numbers. It further modifies the date of birth field to contain only the year of birth. Through these changes, the resulting mortality data set is statistically de-identified as dictated by the expert determination method allowed by HIPAA. To make the de-identified mortality still linkable to other data sets even with PHI / PII removed, we took advantage of the ability of UPK Core to add a unique, encrypted patient token to each record as it performs the de-identification. A token is an irreversible 44-character long string of characters built from a patient s PHI that serves as unique ID for the person, and is reliably reproduced for the same patient in any data set where the software is run. The resulting de-identified, tokenized mortality data set can now be joined to any similarly de-identified and tokenized healthcare data set in a HIPAA-compliant manner, because using this method, no PHI / PII is brought into the healthcare environment. The healthcare analyst simply has to match the tokens in the mortality data set to the tokens in their healthcare data to determine if any of their patients should be marked as deceased (Figure 3). Figure 3. HIPAA-Compliant Joining of Mortality and Healthcare Data Sets: Patient De-identification, Token Creation, and Linking of Data Sets Raw Mortality Data Tokenized Mortality Data Tokenized Healthcare Data John Smith Sally Jones Sumita Raja etc De-identification and Tokenization AAA0001 BBB0002 CCC0505 etc Matching patient records without PHI ZZZ4040 GHGH111 AAA0001 THHT2200 YYY4848 VVV2222 MMM7777 etc Deceased on June 2, 2015 Adding mortality data in HIPAAcompliant manner Patient records in the healthcare data set(s) can now be flagged/updated with death information, while ensuring that users are never exposed to PHI (nor HIPAA violations). For a detailed description of our de-identification/linking process, please see our whitepaper: Overview of Universal Patient Key s De-Identification Technology for Structured Data Universal Patient Key Page 5
6 Characterizing Patient Tokens to Enhance Data Certainty The incorporation of mortality data into healthcare data sets comes with two certainty expectations: that the de-identified deceased patients are accurately matched across the data sets, and that patients in the mortality data set are actually deceased. To address these expectations, UPK developed a method of characterizing the tokenized records in the mortality data. For each mortality record, UPK includes both a uniqueness score, which indicates the likelihood that a unique encrypted token for a given mortality record designates a unique person (i.e. cannot be confused with another individual), and a death validity score, which indicates a confidence value that an individual associated with a given mortality data set is actually deceased. The Uniqueness Score The Uniqueness Score characterizes the encrypted token to help users understand the likelihood that the token designates a truly unique individual. For example, a token scheme may use PHI attributes of name, gender, and birthday to create unique encrypted tokens. Ideally, a single token would correspond to a single individual every time, but a separate study we have performed shows that 1% of tokens are not unique (because they are generated from non-unique PHI, e.g. multiple men named John Smith and born on the same date.) These non-unique tokens can generate multiple matches (i.e. false positives) and could result in inaccurate linking when the mortality data is merged with other datasets. (For the detailed analysis, please see, Matching Accuracy of Patient Tokens in De-Identified Health Data Sets: A False Positive Analysis at To understand the potential false positive rate of each token within the mortality data set, UPK took the token set for each record and determined the number of times the same tokens were present in other records. 99% of records in the mortality data set had a unique token, while the remaining 1% of records had tokens that were non-unique. By counting the number of records sharing a token, we ascribed a Uniqueness Score to the token in each record. This score represents the probability that a match with that token is accurate. For example, if a token is unique, then the Uniqueness Score we ascribe is 100%, meaning that any match with this token is likely to be accurate. Alternatively, a token set that is shared by four different individuals in the mortality data set is given a Uniqueness Score of 25%, meaning that any match with this token to the same token in a healthcare data set only has a 1 in 4 chance of being an accurate match of the correct individual. The Death Validity Score To address the expectation that mortality records accurately reflect deceased patients, UPK characterizes the certainty that the individual is deceased by adding a Death Validity Score to the mortality data set. While this score can be made into a quantitative value, we did not feel that the depth of the data we Universal Patient Key Page 6
7 had access to warranted that type of false precision. Therefore, we opted to characterize the mortality records with a qualitative field. The Death Validity characterization we created is based on a set of logical rules. The first rule we apply is to determine if an individual in the mortality data set is flagged in the original DMF data with a Proof flag (meaning the SSA has received a death certificate) or a Verified flag (meaning a family member has verified the death). The records are flagged in the mortality data as having a higher Death Validity Score. The second rule looks at the remaining un-flagged records to determine which individuals are flagged as deceased in both the original DMF data file and the obituary data file. Any records present in both of the underlying mortality data sets are also flagged as having a higher Death Validity Score. In this way, users of the mortality data set can differentiate between individuals who are more likely to be deceased from those who are not. Study Conclusions Based on this study, we conclude that mortality data can be joined with healthcare data in a HIPAAcompliant manner. We were successful in combining obituary data with SSA DMF data to create a much more robust and representative mortality data set than using either source alone. By de-identifying and tokenizing this data set, we can merge it with healthcare data without bringing PHI into the data environment, thus avoiding a HIPAA violation. To join de-identified mortality records to de-identified healthcare records, we show that unique encrypted patient tokens can be used to generate accurate matches in 99% of cases. We demonstrate that we can identify the 1% of records for whom matching should be viewed with some trepidation through the addition of a Uniqueness Score. We likewise illustrate that we can characterize the strength of the mortality data using a qualitative scoring system, which we call a Death Validity Score. Having proven this method for adding mortality data to healthcare data in a de-identified and HIPAAcompliant manner, UPK is making this mortality data set available to external parties under the product name of the UPK Death Index. The UPK Death Index is updated weekly as new data is added from SSA DMF updates and new obituary data records, and is sent to UPK customers with records tokenized in their site-specific key. In this way, users of UPK s de-identification and linking system can easily and continuously add mortality data to their data sets for fraud prevention, outcomes research, and other use cases. Sources Universal Patient Key Page 7
8 For more information: Contact Jason LaBonte, Ph.D. for questions or comments about this analysis: Contact Lauren Stahl for more information about the UPK products and solutions that were used in this study: Visit the UPK website to read our other whitepapers and materials: About Universal Patient Key, LLC Universal Patient Key (UPK) is firmly committed to delivering more value in healthcare through data analytics while protecting patients privacy. We ve designed cutting-edge, patent-pending, deidentification software that replaces protected health information (PHI) with an encrypted token, a 44-character unique placeholder that can t be reverse-engineered to reveal the original information. Furthermore, our software can create these same patient-specific tokens in any data set, which means that now Data Set A can be combined with Data Set B using the patient tokens to match one record to another without ever sharing the underlying patient information. With our UPK Scrubber software to de-identify unstructured (text) data, and our UPK Death Index to join mortality data to healthcare data without exposure to PHI, UPK offers simple and economical solutions to sharing, linking, and analyzing data in a HIPAA-compliant manner. Universal Patient Key Page 8
9 Glossary of Terms: Covered Entity A covered entity (CE) under HIPAA is a health care provider (e.g. doctors, dentists, pharmacies, etc), a health plan (e.g. private insurance, government programs like Medicare, etc), or a health care clearinghouse (i.e. entities that process and transmit healthcare information). De-identified health data De-identified health data is data that has had PII removed. Per the HIPAA Privacy Rule, healthcare data not in use for clinical support must have all information that can identify a patient removed before use. This rule offers two paths to compliantly remove this information: the Safe Harbor method and the Statistical method. When these identifying elements have been removed, the resulting de-identified health data set can be used without restriction or disclosure. Deterministic matching Deterministic matching is when fields in two data sets are matched using a unique value. In practice, this value can be a social security number, Medicare Beneficiary ID, or any other value that is known to only correspond to a single entity. Deterministic matching has higher accuracy rates than probabilistic matching, but is not perfect due to data entry errors (mis-typing a social security number such that matching on that field actually matches two different individuals). Encrypted patient token Encrypted patient tokens are non-reversible 44 character strings created from a patient s PHI, allowing a patient s records to be matched across different de-identified health data sets without exposure of the original PHI. False positive A false positive is a result that incorrectly states that a test condition is positive. In the case of matching patient records between data sets, a false positive is the condition where a match of two records does not actually represent records for the same patient. False positives are more common in probabilistic matching than in deterministic matching. Fuzzy matching Fuzzy matching is the process of finding values that match approximately rather than exactly. In the case of matching PHI, fuzzy matching can include matching on different variants of a name (Jamie, Jim, and Jimmy all being allowed as a match for James ). To facilitate fuzzy matching, algorithms like SOUNDEX can allow for differently spelled character strings to generate the same output value. Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act The HITECH Act was passed as part of the as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) economic stimulus bill. HITECH was designed to accelerate the adoption of electronic medical records (EMR) through the use of financial incentives for meaningful use of EMRs until 2015, Universal Patient Key
10 and financial penalties for failure to do so thereafter. HITECH added important security regulations and data breach liability rules that built on the rules laid out in HIPAA. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) HIPAA is a U.S. law requiring the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to develop security and privacy regulations for protected health information. Prior to HIPAA, no such standards existed in the industry. HHS created the HIPAA Privacy Rule and HIPAA Security Rule to fulfill their obligation, and the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) within HHS has the responsibility of enforcing these rules. Personally-identifiable information (PII) Personally-identifiable information (PII) is a general term in information and security laws describing any information that allows an individual to be identified either directly or indirectly. PII is a U.S.-centric abbreviation, but is generally equivalent to personal information and similar terms outside the United States. PII can consist as informational elements like name, address, social security number or other identifying number or code, telephone number, address, etc., but can include non-specific data elements such as gender, race, birth date, geographic indicator, etc. that together can still allow indirect identification of an individual. Probabilistic matching Probabilistic matching is when fields in two data sets are matched using values that are known not to be unique, but the combination of values gives a high probability that the correct entity is matched. In practice, names, birth dates, and other identifying but non-unique values can be used (often in combination) to facilitate probabilistic matching. Protected health information (PHI) Protected health information (PHI) refers to information that includes health status, health care (physician visits, prescriptions, procedures, etc.), or payment for that care and can be linked to an individual. Under U.S. law, PHI is information that is specifically created or collected by a covered entity. Safe Harbor de-identification HIPAA guidelines requiring the removal of identifying information offered covered entities a simple, compliant path to satisfying the HIPAA Privacy Rule through the Safe Harbor method. The Safe Harbor de-identification method is to remove any data element that falls within 18 different categories of information, including: 1. Names 2. All geographic subdivisions smaller than a state, including street address, city, county, precinct, ZIP code, and their equivalent geocodes. However, you do not have to remove the first three digits of the ZIP code if there are more than 20,000 people living in that ZIP code. 3. The day and month of dates that are directly related to an individual, including birth date, date of admission and discharge, and date of death. If the patient is over age 89, you must also remove his age and the year of his birth date. Universal Patient Key
11 4. Telephone number 5. Fax number 6. addresses 7. Social Security number 8. Medical record number 9. Health plan beneficiary number 10. Account number 11. Certificate or license number 12. Vehicle identifiers and serial numbers, including license plate numbers 13. Device identifiers and serial numbers 14. Web addresses (URLs) 15. Internet Protocol (IP) addresses 16. Biometric identifiers, such as fingerprints 17. Full-face photographs or comparable images 18. Any other unique identifying number, such as a clinical trial number Social Security Death Master File The U.S. Social Security Administration maintains a file of over 86 million records of deaths collected from social security payments, but it is not a complete compilation of deaths in the United States. In recent years, multiple states have opted out of contributing their information to the Death Master File and its level of completeness has declined substantially. This Death Master File has limited access, and users must be certified to receive it. This file contains PHI elements like social security numbers, names, and dates of birth therefore, bringing the raw data into a healthcare data environment could risk a HIPAA violation. Soundex Soundex is a phonetic algorithm that codes similarly sounding names (in English) as a consistent value. Soundex is commonly used when matching surnames across data sets as variations in spelling are common in data entry. Each soundex code generated from an input text string has 4 characters the first letter of the name, and then 3 digits generated from the remaining characters, with similar-sounding phonetic elements coded the same (e.g. D and T are both coded as a 3, M and N are both coded as a 5). Statistical de-identification (also known as Expert Determination) Because the HIPAA Safe Harbor de-identification method removes all identifying elements, the resulting de-identified health data set is often stripped of substantial analytical value. Therefore, statistical deidentification is used instead (HIPAA calls this pathway to compliance Expert Determination ). In this method, a statistician or HIPAA certification professional certifies that enough identifying data elements have been removed from the health data set that there is a very small risk that a recipient could identify an individual. Statistical de-identification often allows dates of service to remain in de-identified data sets, which are critical for the analysis of a patient s journey, for determining an episode of care, and other common healthcare investigations. Universal Patient Key
Matching Accuracy of Patient Tokens in De-Identified Health Data Sets
Matching Accuracy of Patient Tokens in De-Identified Health Data Sets A False Positive Analysis Executive Summary One of the most important and early tasks all healthcare analytics organizations face is
More informationConnecting the Dots in Specialty Pharmacy Data
Connecting the Dots in Specialty Pharmacy Data Using Encrypted Patient Tokens for HIPAA-Compliant Merging of Specialty Data Sets Executive Summary The rapidly expanding specialty pharmacy market has created
More informationDE-IDENTIFICATION OF PROTECTED HEALTH INFORMATION (PHI)
PRIVACY 8.0 DE-IDENTIFICATION OF PROTECTED HEALTH INFORMATION (PHI) Scope: Purpose: All workforce members (employees and non-employees), including employed medical staff, management, and others who have
More informationTHE JOURNEY FROM PHI TO RHI: USING CLINICAL DATA IN RESEARCH
THE JOURNEY FROM PHI TO RHI: USING CLINICAL DATA IN RESEARCH Helenemarie Blake, Esq. Chief Privacy Officer, Interim Office of HIPAA & Privacy Security August 2016 SCENARIO You are putting a study together
More informationINSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD Investigator Guidance Series HIPAA PRIVACY RULE & AUTHORIZATION THE UNIVERSITY OF UTAH. Definitions.
HIPAA PRIVACY RULE & AUTHORIZATION Definitions Breach. The term breach means the unauthorized acquisition, access, use, or disclosure of protected health information which compromises the security or privacy
More informationThe HIPAA privacy rule and long-term care : a quick guide for researchers
Scripps Gerontology Center Scripps Gerontology Center Publications Miami University Year 2005 The HIPAA privacy rule and long-term care : a quick guide for researchers Jane Straker Patricia Faust Miami
More informationLifeBridge Health HIPAA Policy 4. Uses of Protected Health Information for Research
LifeBridge Health HIPAA Policy 4 Uses of Protected Health Information for Research This Policy contains the following Sections: I. Policy II. III. IV. Definitions Applicability Procedures A. Individual
More informationNavigating HIPAA Regulations. Michelle C. Stickler, DEd Director, Research Subjects Protections
Navigating HIPAA Regulations Michelle C. Stickler, DEd Director, Research Subjects Protections mcstickler@vcu.edu 828-0131 Key Definitions Covered Entity: Organization that handles identifiable health
More informationWhat is HIPAA? Purpose. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996
Patient Privacy and HIPAA/HITECH What is HIPAA? Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 Implemented in 2003 Title II Administrative Simplification It s a federal law HIPAA is mandatory,
More informationPatient-Level Data. February 4, Webinar Series Goals. First Fridays Webinar Series: Medical Education Group (MEG)
First Fridays Webinar Series: Medical Education Group (MEG) Patient-Level Data February 4, 2011 Provide Insights into MEG Operations Share Up-To-Date Information Webinar Series Goals Share Best Practices
More informationA Reality Check on Health Information Privacy: How should we understand re-identification risks under HIPAA?
A Reality Check on Health Information Privacy: How should we understand re-identification risks under HIPAA? Daniel C. Barth-Jones, M.P.H., Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Clinical Epidemiology, Mailman School
More informationPrivacy and Security Orientation for Visiting Observers. DUHS Compliance Office
Privacy and Security Orientation for Visiting Observers DUHS Compliance Office 919-668-2573 compliance@dm.duke.edu Introduction This orientation is to provide new Visiting Observers with the HIPAA Privacy
More informationAPPLICATION FOR RESEARCH REQUESTING AN IRB WAIVER OF CONSENT AND HIPAA AUTHORIZATION
FORM W/H-01 APPLICATION FOR RESEARCH REQUESTING AN IRB WAIVER OF CONSENT AND HIPAA AUTHORIZATION Research for which this form is appropriate generally involves only existing patient records or specimens.
More informationProfessional Compliance Program Grievance Report
Professional Compliance Program Grievance Report Please complete this form carefully. All material that you wish AAOS to consider must either accompany this form or be sent electronically and identified
More informationYALE UNIVERSITY THE RESEARCHERS GUIDE TO HIPAA. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996
YALE UNIVERSITY THE RESEARCHERS GUIDE TO HIPAA Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 Handbook Table of Contents I. Introduction What is HIPAA? What is PHI? What is a Covered Entity
More informationGuidance on De-identification of Protected Health Information September 4, 2012.
Guidance Regarding Methods for De-identification of Protected Health Information in Accordance with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) Privacy Rule September 4, 2012 OCR gratefully
More informationSCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH. HIPAA Privacy Training
SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH HIPAA Privacy Training Public Health and HIPAA This presentation will address the HIPAA Privacy regulations as they effect the activities of the School of Public Health. It is imperative
More informationThe Queen s Medical Center HIPAA Training Packet for Researchers
The Queen s Medical Center HIPAA Training Packet for Researchers 1 The Queen s Medical Center HIPAA Training Packet for Researchers Table of Contents Overview of HIPAA and Research 3 Penalties for violations
More information[Enter Organization Logo] CONSENT TO DISCLOSE HEALTH INFORMATION UNDER MINNESOTA LAW. Policy Number: [Enter] Effective Date: [Enter]
CONSENT TO DISCLOSE HEALTH INFORMATION UNDER MINNESOTA LAW I. Policy: Policy Number: [Enter] Effective Date: [Enter] A. Purpose This policy establishes consent requirements for the disclosure of health
More informationA general review of HIPAA standards and privacy practices 2016
A general review of HIPAA standards and privacy practices 2016 45 CFR, 164 Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act Treatment, Payment and Healthcare Operations 42 CFR, Part 2, Confidentiality
More informationCommission on Dental Accreditation Guidelines for Filing a Formal Complaint Against an Educational Program
Commission on Dental Accreditation Guidelines for Filing a Formal Complaint Against an Educational Program The Commission strongly encourages attempts at informal or formal resolution through the program's
More informationHIPAA. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. Presented by the UMMC Office of Integrity and Compliance
HIPAA Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act Presented by the UMMC Office of Integrity and Compliance Rules and Regulations to ensure Privacy Set Federally recognized standards to ensure both
More informationCLINICIAN S GUIDE TO HIPAA PRIVACY
CLINICIAN S GUIDE TO HIPAA PRIVACY Introduction... 2 What is HIPAA?... 2 Health Information Privacy... 2 Protected Health Information... 3 Identifiers... 3 HIPAA s Impact on Clinical Practice, Treatment,
More informationSafe Harbor Vs the Statistical Method
Safe Harbor Vs the In order to leverage protected health information (PHI) for secondary purposes, an understanding of the different deidentification mechanisms is required. Under the U.S. Health Insurance
More informationHIPAA Privacy Regulations Governing Research
HIPAA Privacy Regulations Governing Research HIPAA Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act In a Nutshell The Privacy Regulations govern a provider s use and disclosure of health information
More informationSan Francisco Department of Public Health Policy Title: HIPAA Compliance Privacy and the Conduct of Research Page 1 of 10
Page 1 of 10 TITLE: HIPAA COMPLIANCE: PRIVACY AND THE CONDUCT OF RESEARCH POLICY It is the policy of the San Francisco Department of Public Health (DPH) to maintain the privacy of Protected Health Information
More informationWRAPPING YOUR HEAD AROUND HIPAA PRIVACY REQUIREMENTS
WRAPPING YOUR HEAD AROUND HIPAA PRIVACY REQUIREMENTS Jeffrey Staton Attorney at Law Legal Aid Society of Louisville 416 W. Muhammad Ali Blvd., Ste. 300 Louisville, KY 40202 Phone: 502.614.3146 Jstaton@laslou.org
More informationA Study on Personal Health Information De-identification Status for Big Data
, pp.54-58 http://dx.doi.org/10.14257/astl.2016.136.14 A Study on Personal Health Information De-identification Status for Big Data Young-Chul Chung 1, Ya-Ri Lee 2, Jung-Sook Kim 3* 1, Ho-Kyun Park 4 1
More informationElectronic Health Records and Meaningful Use
Electronic Health Records and Meaningful Use How to Receive Your CE Credits Read your selected course Completed the quiz at the end of the course with a 70% or greater. Complete the evaluation for your
More informationHIPAA COMPLIANCE APPLICATION
1 HIPAA COMPLIANCE APPLICATION PROJECT TITLE: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR Name (Last, First): Please complete this form if you intend to use/disclose protected health information (PHI) in your research. An
More informationIRB 101. Rachel Langhofer Joan Rankin Shapiro Research Administration UA College of Medicine - Phoenix
IRB 101 Rachel Langhofer Joan Rankin Shapiro Research Administration UA College of Medicine - Phoenix Contents Brief discussion of regulations IRB Structure Levels of Approval Informed Consent HIPAA/HITECH
More informationThe HIPAA Privacy Rule and Research: An Overview
The HIPAA Privacy Rule and Research: An Overview Joy Pritts, JD Research Associate Professor Health Policy Institute Georgetown University jlp@georgetown.edu 1 Topics HIPAA Background Overview of Privacy
More informationUNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS HIPAA PRIVACY AND SECURITY DIRECTIVE
May 19, 2016 UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS HIPAA PRIVACY AND SECURITY DIRECTIVE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS HIPAA PRIVACY AND SECURITY DIRECTIVE Table of Contents DIRECTIVE INFORMATION... 4 BACKGROUND... 4 APPLICABILITY...
More informationHIPAA Policies and Procedures Manual
UNIVERSITY of NORTH CAROLINA at CHAPEL HILL SCHOOL of NURSING HIPAA Policies and Procedures Manual November 2015 1 Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION... 3 A. GENERAL POLICY... 3 B. SCOPE... 3 II. DEFINITIONS...
More informationHIPAA PRIVACY TRAINING
HIPAA PRIVACY TRAINING HIPAA Privacy Training Objective Present a general overview of HIPAA and define important terms Understand the purpose of HIPAA and the Privacy Rule Understand the term Protected
More informationNotice of Privacy Practices
River Valley Chiropractic LLC Notice of Privacy Practices Effective 9/2014; Revised 9/2014 If you have any questions about this notice, please contact the River Valley Chiropractic Privacy Officer at 308-534-5840.
More informationHIPAA Compliancy Group, LLC. 2017
1 Meet Your Expert Proud Sponsor Visionary Contributor Endorsed Partner Marc Haskelson Compliancy Group, CEO Marc@compliancygroup.com CompTIA Channel Advisory Board Co Chair CompTIA Business Applications
More informationMemorial Hermann Information Exchange. MHiE POLICIES & PROCEDURES MANUAL
Memorial Hermann Information Exchange MHiE POLICIES & PROCEDURES MANUAL TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Definitions 3 2. Hardware/Software Supported Platform Requirements 4 3. Anti-virus Software Requirement 4 4.
More informationNew HIPAA Privacy Regulations Governing Research. Karen Blackwell, MS Director, HIPAA Compliance
New HIPAA Privacy Regulations Governing Research Karen Blackwell, MS Director, HIPAA Compliance kblackwe@kumc.edu 913-588 588-0942 HIPAA Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act In a Nutshell
More informationA self-assessment for GxP and HIPAA concerns
WHITE PAPER IS YOUR ORGANIZATION AT RISK? A self-assessment for GxP and HIPAA concerns MDDX RESEARCH & INFORMATICS 58 California St, Floor 6 San Francisco, California 9 T (8) -MDDX F (866) 8-696 info@mddx.com
More informationPRIVACY POLICY USES AND DISCLOSURES FOR TREATMENT, PAYMENT, AND HEALTH CARE OPERATIONS
PRIVACY POLICY As of April 14, 2003, the Federal regulation on patient information privacy, known as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), requires that we provide (in writing)
More informationNCPDP Work Group 11 Task Group: RxFill White Paper on Implementation Issues
NCPDP Work Group 11 Task Group: RxFill White Paper on Implementation Issues Purpose: To highlight and provide a general overview of issues that arise in the implementation of RxFill transactions. The discussion
More informationCompliance Program, Code of Conduct, and HIPAA
Compliance Program, Code of Conduct, and HIPAA Agenda Introduction to Compliance The Compliance Program Code of Conduct Reporting Concerns HIPAA Why have a Compliance Program Procedures to follow applicable
More informationNew Study Submissions to the IRB
New Study Submissions to the IRB Tufts-New England Medical Center Tufts University Health Sciences IRB Education Series 2006 Presentation may only be reused or reprinted with written permission from the
More informationAdvanced HIPAA Communications and University Relations
Advanced HIPAA Communications and University Relations accepts no liability of any use reliance placed on it, as it is warranty, express, or implied, or completeness of 1 the HIPAA Health Insurance Portability
More informationCOMMISSION ON DENTAL ACCREDITATION GUIDELINES FOR PREPARING REQUESTS FOR TRANSFER OF SPONSORSHIP
COMMISSION ON DENTAL ACCREDITATION GUIDELINES FOR PREPARING REQUESTS FOR TRANSFER OF SPONSORSHIP REQUESTS FOR TRANSFER OF SPONSORSHIP OF ACCREDITED PROGRAMS The sponsorship of an accredited program may
More informationWHAT IS AN IRB? WHAT IS AN IRB? 3/25/2015. Presentation Outline
Education &Training WHAT IS AN IRB? Introduction to the UofL Institutional Review Boards & Human Subjects Protection Program IRB Review Process Post Approval Monitoring March 2015 1 Presentation Outline
More informationAccess to Patient Information for Research Purposes: Demystifying the Process!
Access to Patient Information for Research Purposes: Demystifying the Process! Cynthia Nappa Institutional Privacy Administrator State University of New York Upstate Medical University 1 Administrative
More informationAn Introduction to the HIPAA Privacy Rule. Prepared for
An Introduction to the HIPAA Privacy Rule Prepared for January 2005 An Introduction to the HIPAA Privacy Rule Prepared for Covering Kids & Families National Program Office Southern Institute on Children
More informationSystem-wide Policy: Use and Disclosure of Protected Health Information for Research
System-wide Policy: Use and Disclosure of Protected Health Information for Research Origination Date: May 2016 Next Review Date: May 2019 Effective Date: May 2016 Reference #: SYS ADMIN-RA-005 Approval
More informationCHI Mercy Health. Definitions
CHI Mercy Health Definitions If you have any questions about this notice, please contact the CHI Mercy Health s Privacy Office at (701) 845-6540 or 570 Chautauqua Blvd, Valley City ND 58072. Notice of
More informationHIPAA and HITECH: Privacy and Security of Protected Health Information
HIPAA and HITECH: Privacy and Security of Protected Health Information What is HIPAA? Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 A federal law enacted to: Protect the privacy of a patient
More informationDe-identification and Clinical Trials Data: Oh the Possibilities!
De-identification and Clinical Trials Data: Oh the Possibilities! Bradley Malin, Ph.D. Assoc. Prof. & Vice Chair of Biomedical Informatics, School of Medicine Assoc. Prof. of Computer Science, School of
More informationHealthStream Ambulatory Regulatory Course Descriptions
This course covers three related aspects of medical care. All three are critical for the safety of patients. Avoiding Errors: Communication, Identification, and Verification These three critical issues
More informationCOMMISSION ON DENTAL ACCREDITATION REPORTING PROGRAM CHANGES IN ACCREDITED PROGRAMS
COMMISSION ON DENTAL ACCREDITATION REPORTING PROGRAM CHANGES IN ACCREDITED PROGRAMS The Commission on Dental Accreditation recognizes that education and accreditation are dynamic, not static, processes.
More informationPatient Privacy Requirements Beyond HIPAA
Patient Privacy Requirements Beyond HIPAA Jane Hyatt Thorpe, J.D. School of Public Health and Health Services George Washington University Carrie Bill, J.D. Feldesman Tucker Leifer Fidell LLP The George
More informationGuidelines for Requesting an Increase in Enrollment in a Predoctoral Dental Education Program
Guidelines for Requesting an Increase in Enrollment in a Predoctoral Dental Education Program TIMING OF REQUESTS AND RESPONSE: Approval of an increase in enrollment in predoctoral dental education programs
More informationOffice of the Chief Privacy Officer. Privacy & Security in an App Enabled World HIMSS, Tuesday March 1, 2016, Las Vegas, NV
Office of the Chief Privacy Officer Privacy & Security in an App Enabled World HIMSS, Tuesday March 1, 2016, Las Vegas, NV Table of Contents Introduction Why Apps? What ONC is doing to advance use of Apps
More informationDe-Identification Reduce Privacy Risks When Sharing Personally Identifiable Information
De-Identification Reduce Privacy Risks When Sharing Personally Identifiable Information De-Identification Unlock the value in your data Privacy Analytics Inc. is commercializing the technology developed
More informationValley Regional Medical Center HIPAA AND HITECH EDUCATION
Valley Regional Medical Center HIPAA AND HITECH EDUCATION Privacy and Security of Protected Health Information 1 HIPAA and Its Purpose What is HIPAA? Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act
More informationChapter 9 Legal Aspects of Health Information Management
Chapter 9 Legal Aspects of Health Information Management EXERCISE 9-1 Legal and Regulatory Terms 1. T 2. F 3. F 4. F 5. F EXERCISE 9-2 Maintaining the Patient Record in the Normal Course of Business 1.
More informationChallenges for National Large Laboratories to Ensure Implementation of ELR Meaningful Use
White Paper Challenges for National Large Laboratories to Ensure Implementation of ELR Meaningful Use January, 2012 Developed by the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE) and the Centers
More informationIt defines basic terms and lists basic principles that all LSUHSC-NO faculty, staff, residents and students must understand and follow.
Office of Compliance Programs Revised: July 18, 2017 HIPAA Privacy HIPAA Privacy Workforce Training The Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act (HIPAA) requires that the University train all
More informationHow will the system be used? Small practice Large Multispecialty group How well do the workflows and content
Electronic Medical Records All EMRs are the same Milisa Rizer, MD Chief Medical Information Officer Associate Professor Clinical Department of Family Medicine The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center
More informationHEALTH INSURANCE PORTABILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT
HEALTH INSURANCE PORTABILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT INSTRUCTIONS Read through this presentation. Submit completed post test to the Portage County MRC Coordinator. Estimated completion time: 1 hour Learning
More informationPennsylvania Hospital & Surgery Center ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY MANUAL
Page 1 Issued: POLICY: Committee Approval: HIPAA Administrative Policy Review Committee: April 2003 April 2005 April 2006 April 2007 April 2008 Attachment(s): For purposes of this policy, Pennsylvania
More informationHIPAA Privacy Rule. Best PHI Privacy Practices
HIPAA Privacy Rule Best PHI Privacy Practices Learning Objectives Define the acronym HIPAA. Understand your role and responsibilities under the privacy regulations. Know what patient s rights are in terms
More informationTechnology Standards of Practice
2016 Technology Standards of Practice Used with permission from the Association of Social Work Boards (2016) Table of Contents Technology Standards of Practice 2 Definitions 2 Section 1 Practitioner Competence
More informationMCCP Online Orientation
1 Objectives At the conclusion of this presentation, students will be able to: Discuss application of HIPAA to student s role. Describe the federal requirements of the HIPAA/HITECH regulations that protect
More informationAGENDA. 10:45 a.m. CT Attendees Sign On 11:00 a.m. CT Webinar 11:50 a.m. CT Questions and Answers
AGENDA 10:45 a.m. CT Attendees Sign On 11:00 a.m. CT Webinar 11:50 a.m. CT Questions and Answers Asking Questions Throughout the webinar, type your questions using the "send note" button at the top of
More informationCOMMISSION ON DENTAL ACCREDITATION POLICY ON REPORTING AND APPROVAL OF SITES WHERE EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITY OCCURS
COMMISSION ON DENTAL ACCREDITATION POLICY ON REPORTING AND APPROVAL OF SITES WHERE EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITY OCCURS The Commission on Dental Accreditation recognizes that students/residents may gain educational
More informationHow will the system be used? Small practice Large Multispecialty group How well do the workflows and content represent your specialty and care
Myth-Destroyers Electronic Medical Records Milisa Rizer, MD Chief Medical Information Officer Associate Professor Clinical Department of Family Medicine The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center
More informationSystem of Records Notice (SORN) Checklist
System of Records Notice (SORN) Checklist Do not use any tabs, bolding, underscoring, or italicization in the system of records notice submissions to the Defense Privacy Office. Use this as a checklist
More informationHIPAA THE PRIVACY RULE
HIPAA THE PRIVACY RULE Reviewed December 2012 HISTORY In 2000, many patients that were newly diagnosed with depression received free samples of antidepressant medications in their mail. 2 HISTORY Many
More informationStudent Orientation: HIPAA Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act
_ Student Orientation: HIPAA Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act HIPAA: National Privacy Law History of HIPAA What was once an ethical responsibility to protect a patient s privacy is now
More informationNebraska Final Report for. State-based Cardiovascular Disease Surveillance Data Pilot Project
Nebraska Final Report for State-based Cardiovascular Disease Surveillance Data Pilot Project Principle Investigators: Ming Qu, PhD Public Health Support Unit Administrator Nebraska Department of Health
More informationNATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR STATE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES AUTHORITIES (NASCSA) MODEL PRESCRIPTION MONITORING PROGRAM (PMP) ACT (2016) COMMENT
1 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR STATE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES AUTHORITIES (NASCSA) MODEL PRESCRIPTION MONITORING PROGRAM (PMP) ACT (2016) SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act shall be known and may be cited as the
More informationNotice of HIPAA Privacy Practices Updates
Notice of HIPAA Privacy Practices Updates The following is a summary of the updates to the privacy notice for Meridian Hospitals Corporation, Meridian Home Care Services, Inc., Meridian Nursing & Rehabilitation,
More informationThe future of patient care. 6 ways workflow automation will transform the healthcare experience
The future of patient care 6 ways workflow automation will transform the healthcare experience Workflow automation: The foundation for improved patient care The patient lifecycle goes through many phases.
More informationHow can oncology practices deliver better care? It starts with staying connected.
How can oncology practices deliver better care? It starts with staying connected. A system rooted in oncology Compared to other EHRs that I ve used, iknowmed is the best EHR for medical oncology. Physician
More informationThe EU GDPR: Implications for U.S. Universities and Academic Medical Centers
The EU GDPR: Implications for U.S. Universities and Academic Medical Centers Mark Barnes February 21, 2018 Agenda Introduction Jurisdictional Scope of the GDPR Compared with the Directive Offering Goods
More informationHITECH Act, EHR Adoption, Meaningful Use Criteria, ARRA Grants, and Adoption Alternatives. The MARYLAND HEALTH CARE COMMISSION
HITECH Act, EHR Adoption, Meaningful Use Criteria, ARRA Grants, and Adoption Alternatives The MARYLAND HEALTH CARE COMMISSION On February 17, 2009, President Barack Obama signed the American Recovery
More informationHITECH Act. Overview and Estimated Timeline
HITECH Act Overview and Estimated Timeline Key Program, Distribution, Use and Recipients for the HITECH Act* Focused Funds ($2 billion) PROGRAM DISTRIBUTION AGENCY USE OF FUNDS RECIPIENTS HIE Planning
More informationPARAGOULD DOCTORS CLINIC PRIVACY NOTICE
PARAGOULD DOCTORS CLINIC PRIVACY NOTICE Protected Health Information THIS NOTICE DESCRIBES HOW MEDICAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOU MAY BE USED AND DISCLOSED AND HOW YOU CAN GET ACCESS TO THIS INFORMATION. PLEASE
More informationPatient Matching within a Health Information Exchange
Patient Matching within a Health Information Exchange by Tim Godlove, PhD, and Adrian W. Ball, MSc, PMP Abstract The purpose of this article is to describe the patient matching problems resulting from
More informationFERPA 101. December 4, Michael Hawes Director of Student Privacy Policy U.S. Department of Education
FERPA 101 December 4, 017 Michael Hawes Director of Student Privacy Policy U.S. Department of Education United States Department of Education Privacy Technical Assistance Center The U.S. Department of
More informationThe American Recovery and Reinvestment Act: Incentivizing Investments in Healthcare
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act: Incentivizing Investments in Healthcare AT&T, Healthcare, and You Overview The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) allocated more than $180
More informationRECORD RETENTION: Imaging Data Longevity
WHITE PAPER RECORD RETENTION: Imaging Data Longevity MDDX Research & Informatics 580 California St, Floor 16 San Francisco, California 94104 T (800) 441-MDDX F (866) 382-4696 info@mddx.com www.mddx.com
More informationPfizer Patient Assistance Program: Instructions for Group D Enrollment Form
Pfizer Patient Assistance Program: Instructions for Group D Enrollment Form This enrollment form is for patients who would like to apply to receive Lyrica (pregabalin) or Lyrica CR (pregabalin) extended
More informationChapter 19 Section 3. Privacy And Security Of Protected Health Information (PHI)
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) of 1996 Chapter 19 Section 3 1.0 BACKGROUND AND APPLICABILITY 1.1 The contractor shall comply with the provisions of the Health Insurance Portability
More informationViewing the GDPR Through a De-Identification Lens: A Tool for Clarification and Compliance. Mike Hintze 1
Viewing the GDPR Through a De-Identification Lens: A Tool for Clarification and Compliance Mike Hintze 1 In May 2018, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) will become enforceable as the basis
More informationThe Impact of The HIPAA Privacy Rule on Research
The Impact of The HIPAA Privacy Rule on Research This is simplification? Upstate Medical University WHAT HASN T CHANGED All research involving human subjects must be reviewed and approved by the IRB. The
More informationENTERPRISE INCOME VERIFICATION (EIV) SECURITY POLICY
ENTERPRISE INCOME VERIFICATION (EIV) SECURITY POLICY Rev. October 2011 EIV Security Policy Acknowledgment Form By signing this form I acknowledge my receipt of the EIV System Security Policy approved by
More informationCIO Legislative Brief
CIO Legislative Brief Comparison of Health IT Provisions in the Committee Print of the 21 st Century Cures Act (dated November 25, 2016), H.R. 6 (21 st Century Cures Act) and S. 2511 (Improving Health
More informationFOUR TIPS: THE INVISIBLE IMPACT OF CREDENTIALING
FOUR TIPS: THE INVISIBLE IMPACT OF CREDENTIALING The Invisible Impact of Credentialing Four Tips: The past 8 to 10 years have been transformative in the business of providing healthcare. The 2009 American
More informationHealthcare Identifiers Service Information Guide
Healthcare Identifiers Service Information Guide Introduction and overview Audience This information guide is intended for all individual healthcare providers and organisations seeking to participate in
More informationBest practices in using secondary analysis as a method
Best practices in using secondary analysis as a method Katharine Green, PhD(c), CNM University of Massachusetts Amherst, USA July, 2015 University of Massachusetts Amherst, U.S.A. Secondary data analysis:
More informationPrivacy Toolkit for Social Workers and Social Service Workers Guide to the Personal Health Information Protection Act, 2004 (PHIPA)
Social Workers and Social Service Workers Guide to the Personal Health Information Protection Act, 2004 (PHIPA) COPYRIGHT 2005 BY ONTARIO COLLEGE OF SOCIAL WORKERS AND SOCIAL SERVICE WORKERS ALL RIGHTS
More informationUnique Health Safety Identifier. Across The Continuum of Care
Unique Health Safety Identifier Across The Continuum of Care Andy Nieto, Health Solutions Executive @ALN669 Trend Longer Life Average life expectancy in OECD countries in 2012 was 80 YEARS, an increase
More informationPHR and the Issue of Patients Altering Professionally-Sourced Data
PHR and the Issue of Patients Altering HIMSS 2010-2011 Health Information Exchange Committee HIE PHR & Patient Engagement Workgroup July 2011 Table of Contents Introduction... 3 Background... 3 Issue...
More information