Cited by 36Thoreau and American LiteratureInformation and Cyber SecurityHealthcare Regulation

HIPAA security compliance challenges: The case for small healthcare providers

Chen, Jim Q., Benusa, Allen·2017·International Journal of Healthcare Management

Abstract

More than 60% of physicians in the U.S. practice as small healthcare providers. The realm of small healthcare providers includes dental offices, orthodontists, chiropractors, massage therapists, optometrists, long-term care facilities and other small, independent clinics that typically have 1 –30 employees. While studies have reported variable levels of Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) information security (InfoSec) compliance among hospitals and large medical facilities (Anthony DL, Appari A, Johnson ME. Institutionalizing HIPAA compliance: Organizations and competing logics in U.S. health care. J Health Soc Behav 2014;55(1):108–24; Brady, JW. Securing health care: Assessing factors that affect HIPAA security compliance in academic medical centers. Proceedings of the 2011 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Manoa, Hawaii; 2011.), small healthcare providers face even more challenges in their effort to be HIPAA compliant. This paper will use a case study to examine factors that affect the small healthcare providers’ effort in meeting HIPAA InfoSec compliance. The paper also discusses services and technologies available to them to become compliant and how they can maintain continued compliance once they become compliant. Both a process model and an action compass are proposed to guide small healthcare providers. This case study provides support to existing compliance theories. The proposed guidance is useful for not only small healthcare providers but also mid-sized and large businesses in general.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/20479700.2016.1270875

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • HIPAA and GDPR do not directly mention AI, but several of their clauses have relevance to AI applications and can be challenged by new ways that AI processes personal data.

    “Moreover, HIPAA and GDPR do not directly mention AI, several of its clauses have relevance to AI applications and can be challenged by new ways that AI processes personal data [165], [166].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chen, J. Q., & Benusa, A.
Affiliations
St. Cloud State University (US)
Corresponding author
Chen, Jim Q.
Venue
International Journal of Healthcare Management
Published
2017-01-12
Volume
10
Issue
2
Pages
135-146
ISSN
  • 2047-9700 (ISSN-L)
  • 2047-9719
OpenAlex
W2575448578
Cited by
36
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3
FWCI
4.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
International Journal of Healthcare Management (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Thoreau and American Literature
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information and Cyber Security
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Healthcare Regulation
Keywords
HIPAA compliance, information security, health information privacy, compliance challenges, compliance guidance, process model, dental practice, chiropractic clinics, long-term care facilities

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