Abstract
We reported at AMIA 1999 on the apparent lack of privacy protection for the subjects of case reports at 32 websites. It has been clear for some time that print journal editors and Institutional Review Boards require informed consent from patients or their surrogates if they can be potentially identified in publications. We found in 1999 that this level of confidentiality protection was not being applied to case reports on the Internet. This report is a follow up evaluation of those and 26 other websites with case reports to see if confidentiality protection practices have improved.