Here are some key takeaways for practitioners:
- Pseudonymized vs. Anonymized Data: GDPR treats pseudonymized data as identifiable personal data, requiring the same level of protection as fully identifiable data. This differs from practices in other jurisdictions, like the US, where pseudonymized data can be considered de-identified.
- Legal Basis for Processing: Finding a lawful basis for processing personal data for secondary research is challenging under GDPR. Explicit consent is often not feasible, and alternatives like broad consent are limited by stringent interpretations of the regulation.
- Cross-Border Data Transfers: GDPR restricts the transfer of personal data outside the EU unless the receiving country offers adequate data protection. This is particularly challenging for international research collaborations.
To mitigate these challenges, it is crucial to stay informed about evolving regulatory guidance and to consider the following strategies:
- Data Minimization and Pseudonymization: Implement robust data minimization and pseudonymization techniques to reduce the risk of data re-identification and ensure compliance with GDPR.
- Seek Expert Guidance: Engage with legal and data protection experts to navigate the complex regulatory landscape and identify compliant pathways for data processing.
- Collaborate and Share Knowledge: Work with peers and regulatory bodies to share best practices and advocate for clearer guidance and feasible regulatory frameworks for secondary research.
As practitioners dedicated to improving outcomes for children, it is essential to leverage data responsibly and ethically. By understanding and addressing the challenges posed by GDPR, we can continue to advance our research and provide high-quality online therapy services to schools.
To read the original research paper, please follow this link: Disruptive and avoidable: GDPR challenges to secondary research uses of data.
