CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 14Social Work Education and PracticeEthics and bioethics in healthcarePatient Dignity and Privacy

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Privacy and confidentiality in social work

Collingridge, Mike, Miller, Seumas, Bowles, Wendy·2001·Australian Social Work
DOI 10.1080/03124070108414319
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In the human services confidentiality is a central principle defining the relationship between the worker and the client. In this paper the authors argue that the human services have privileged the notion of confidentiality over the more fundamental right of privacy. They argue there is a persistent confusion between these two concepts and that privacy is an important but neglected ethical concept within human services. The authors discuss the relationship between privacy and confidentiality and identii some of the implications of the privacy concept for practice.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/03124070108414319

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Finn P., 1992, Sydney Law Review, 14, 317
  2. Neave, M. 1987.‘Confidentiality and the Duty to Warn’, Vol. 9, 1–31. University of Tasmania Law Review.
  3. 1993, Protecting Privacy in Computerised Medical Information.
  4. Warren S. D., 1890, Harvard law Review, 4

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Collingridge, M., Miller, S., & Bowles, W.
Affiliations
Charles Sturt University (AU)
ORCID
Venue
Australian Social Work
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2001-06
Volume
54
Issue
2
Pages
3-13
ISSN
  • 0312-407X (ISSN-L)
  • 1447-0748
DOI
10.1080/03124070108414319
OpenAlex
W2038649162
Cited by
14
References
10
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 1
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Australian Social Work (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Public Administration › Social Work Education and Practice
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Issues, ethics and legal aspects › Patient Dignity and Privacy
Keywords
privacy, confidentiality, social work ethics, client-worker relationship, moral concepts, professional practice

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review