Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Mar 16;5(3):1728.
doi: 10.23889/ijpds.v7i1.1728. eCollection 2020.

Participant acceptability of digital footprint data collection strategies: an exemplar approach to participant engagement and involvement in the ALSPAC birth cohort study

Kate Shiells  1   2   3 , Nina Di Cara  3 , Anya Skatova  1   2   3 , Oliver S P Davis  1   3 , Claire M A Haworth  2   4 , Andy L Skinner  1   5 , Richard Thomas  3 , Alastair R Tanner  3 , John Macleod  6   7 , Nicholas J Timpson  3   6 , Andy Boyd  3   6   8
Affiliations

Participant acceptability of digital footprint data collection strategies: an exemplar approach to participant engagement and involvement in the ALSPAC birth cohort study

Kate Shiells et al. Int J Popul Data Sci. .

Abstract

Introduction: Digital footprint records - the tracks and traces amassed by individuals as a result of their interactions with the internet, digital devices and services - can provide ecologically valid data on individual behaviours. These could enhance longitudinal population study databanks; but few UK longitudinal studies are attempting this. When using novel sources of data, study managers must engage with participants in order to develop ethical data processing frameworks that facilitate data sharing whilst safeguarding participant interests.

Objectives: This paper aims to summarise the participant involvement approach used by the ALSPAC birth cohort study to inform the development of a framework for using linked participant digital footprint data, and provide an exemplar for other data linkage infrastructures.

Methods: The paper synthesises five qualitative forms of inquiry. Thematic analysis was used to code transcripts for common themes in relation to conditions associated with the acceptability of sharing digital footprint data for longitudinal research.

Results: We identified six themes: participant understanding; sensitivity of location data; concerns for third parties; clarity on data granularity; mechanisms of data sharing and consent; and trustworthiness of the organisation. For cohort members to consider the sharing of digital footprint data acceptable, they require information about the value, validity and risks; control over sharing elements of the data they consider sensitive; appropriate mechanisms to authorise or object to their records being used; and trust in the organisation.

Conclusion: Realising the potential for using digital footprint records within longitudinal research will be subject to ensuring that this use of personal data is acceptable; and that rigorously controlled population data science benefiting the public good is distinguishable from the misuse and lack of personal control of similar data within other settings. Participant co-development informs the ethical-governance framework for these novel linkages in a manner which is acceptable and does not undermine the role of the trusted data custodian.

Keywords: ALSPAC; attitudes; co-development; data linkage; digital footprint data; engagement; longitudinal research; participant involvement; safeguards.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Statement of conflicts of interests: None to be declared.

Figures

Panel 1: Overarching approach to participant involvement in the design and operation of ALSPAC
Panel 1: Overarching approach to participant involvement in the design and operation of ALSPAC
Figure 1: Cards illustrating a range of routinely generated data sources
Figure 1: Cards illustrating a range of routinely generated data sources
Figure 2: An example of a completed template from the elicitation exercise-keep in methods
Figure 2: An example of a completed template from the elicitation exercise-keep in methods
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Lambiotte R, Kosinski M. Tracking the digital footprints of personality. Proceedings of the IEEE. 2014;102(12):1934–1939. [6939627]. 10.1109/JPROC.2014.2359054. - DOI
    1. Bidargaddi N, Musiat P, Makinen V, Ermes M, Schrader G, Licinio J. Digital footprints: facilitating large-scale environmental psychiatric research in naturalistic settings through data from everyday technologies. Mol Psychiatry. 2017; 22:164–169. 10.1038/mp.2016.224. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Pell JP, Valentine J, Inskip H. One in 30 people in the UK take part in cohort studies. Lancet. 2014. Mar 22;383(9922):1015. 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60412-8. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Davis-Kean P, Chambers RL, Davidson LL, Kleinert C, Ren Q, Tang S. Longitudinal studies strategic review: 2017 report to the Economic and Social Research Council. ESRC. 2017. https://esrc.ukri.org/files/news-events-and-publications/publications/lo....
    1. Wellcome Trust. Wellcome’s Longitudinal Population Studies Working Group: Longitudinal Population Studies Strategy.2017. https://wellcome.org/sites/default/files/longitudinal-population-studies....

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources