Measuring the willingness to share personal health information: a systematic review.

Background: In the age of digitalization and big data, personal health information is a key resource for health care and clinical research. This study aimed to analyze the determinants and describe the measurement of the willingness to disclose personal health information. Methods: The study conducted a systematic review of articles assessing willingness to share personal health information as a primary or secondary outcome. The review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis protocol. English and Italian peer-reviewed research articles were included with no restrictions for publication years. Findings were narratively synthesized. Results: The search strategy found 1,087 papers, 89 of which passed the screening for title and abstract and the full-text assessment. Conclusion: No validated measurement tool has been developed for willingness to share personal health information. The reviewed papers measured it through surveys, interviews, and questionnaires, which were mutually incomparable. The secondary use of data was the most important determinant of willingness to share, whereas clinical and socioeconomic variables had a slight effect. The main concern discouraging data sharing was privacy, although good data anonymization and the high perceived benefits of sharing may overcome this issue.

Photography as the Sole Means of Proof: Medical Liability in Dermatology.

Malignant melanoma is a cutaneous malignancy resulting from the uncontrolled proliferation of melanocytes and poses a challenge diagnostically because neoplastic lesions can mimic benign lesions, which are much more common in the population. Doctors, when they suspect the presence of melanoma, arrange for its removal and the performance of a histological examination to ascertain its diagnosis; in cases where the dermatoscopic examination is indicative of benignity, however, after the lesion is removed, histological examination is not always performed, a very dangerous occurrence and a harbinger of further medico-legal problems. The authors present a court litigation case of an "alleged" failure to diagnose malignant melanoma in a patient who died of brain metastases from melanoma in the absence of a certain location of the primary tumor: the physician who had removed a benign lesion a few months earlier was sued, and only thanks to the presence of photographic documentation was the health care provider able to prove his extraneousness. The aim of this paper is to formulate a proposal for a dermatological protocol to be followed in cases of excisions of benign skin lesions with a twofold purpose: on the one hand, to be able to prove, in a judicial context, the right action on the part of the sanitarians; on the other hand, to avoid the rise of so-called "defensive medicine".

Multidisciplinary analysis of bite marks in a fatal human dog attack: A case report.

INTRODUCTION: Lethal injuries by animal attacks are a matter of concern for the forensic pathologist; the presented case illustrates a two dogs attack on a 61-year-old man. The authors have focused on a multidisciplinary approach involving forensic pathologists and veterinarians. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The victim was cycling in the countryside when he was attacked by two dogs that came out of a large house. He was found lying in the street by the homeowners who called for help. The victim was transported to the hospital where he died five days later. According to recovery data and medico-legal autopsy findings the cause of death was septic shock. RESULTS: Forensic pathologists and veterinarians multidisciplinary evaluation revealed lacerations, abrasions, and multiple small punctures constituting bite marks over the entire body. Six skin dowels with bite marks were taken and compared with the dental cast of the dogs. CONCLUSION: A comparison of the dog dental casts and the bite marks on the victim's body allowed the identification of the animals involved in the attack.