Melbourne Law School - Research Publications

Permanent URI for this collection

http://hdl.handle.net/11343/382

Filters

2019 - 2020 2
Reset filters

Settings
Statistics
Citations
End date: 2022 × Author: Kaye, Jane × Author: Taylor, Mark × Type: Journal Article ×

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Consent for Data Processing under the General Data Protection Regulation: Could ‘Dynamic Consent’ be a Useful Tool for Researchers?
    Prictor, M ; Teare, H ; Bell, J ; Taylor, M ; Kaye, J (Henry Stewart Publishing, 2019)
    The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) sets the bar high for consent for the processing of personal data. In the UK, researchers have been directed to rely on legal bases other than consent for processing personal data for research purposes. Informed consent, nonetheless, and despite certain shortcomings, holds a central position in ethical research practice, as well as at common law, and in a range of other legislation dealing with research involving humans. This paper evaluates the place of informed consent in research following the GDPR’s implementation, arguing that a fresh approach to consent — specifically the concept known as ‘dynamic consent’ — could provide a way for researchers to meet the new European regulatory requirements for data processing while adhering to the highest ethical standards for research conduct. It analyses dynamic consent according to specific GDPR requirements and reflects on practical examples that could inform future implementation of the approach, while remaining aware of the need for further empirical research.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Clinical Decision Support Systems and Medico-Legal Liability in Recall and Treatment: A Fresh Examination
    Prictor, M ; Taylor, M ; Kaye, J ; Emery, J ; Nelson, C ; Manski-Nankervis, J (Thomson Reuters, 2020)
    Clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) provide a valuable tool for clinicians to aid in the care of patients with chronic disease. Various questions have emerged about their implications for the doctor’s legal duty of care to their patients, in terms of recognition of risk, recall, testing and treatment. In this article, through an analysis of Australian legislation and international case law, we address these questions, considering the potential impact of CDSSs on doctors’ liability in negligence. We conclude that the appropriate use of a well-designed CDSS should minimise, rather than heighten, doctor’s potential liability. It should support optimal patient care without diminishing the capacity of the doctor to make individualised decisions about recall, testing and treatment for each patient. We foreshadow that in the future doctors in Australia may have a duty to use available well-established software systems in patient care.