Ethics tools for strengthening ethics review: A scoping Review.

IF 4.4 1区哲学 Q1 MEDICAL ETHICS

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2026-08-01 Epub Date: 2026-03-17 DOI:10.1080/08989621.2026.2642202

Antonija Mijatović, Bruno Kačer, Dea Miletić, Tea Vranković, Nika Vuco, Ana Marušić

{"title":"Ethics tools for strengthening ethics review: A scoping Review.","authors":"Antonija Mijatović, Bruno Kačer, Dea Miletić, Tea Vranković, Nika Vuco, Ana Marušić","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2026.2642202","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Ethics review of research and innovation activities face growing challenges due to rapid scientific and technological advances, interdisciplinary research, and wider societal implications, such as environmental impacts and value conflicts.Methods: To promote more adaptive and robust governance, we conducted a scoping review of tools and frameworks developed to enhance ethics review.Results: A systematic search of Scopus and Web of Science identified 39 relevant publications describing conceptual and practical ethics tools, including scenario-based planning, ethical matrices, anticipatory governance frameworks, participatory deliberation models, decision-support protocols, and computational approaches. These tools were applied across domains such as artificial intelligence, genomics, conservation, and public health. Key themes included early-stage ethics integration, participatory engagement, managing value conflicts, and addressing uncertainty. The tools were mapped within a two-dimensional matrix describing variations in engagement (expert-driven vs. participatory) and temporal orientation (reactive vs. anticipatory), illustrating a shift toward anticipatory and participatory approaches.Conclusions: These findings indicate a move from static, checklist-based reviews to dynamic, participatory, and forward-looking ethics governance.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"2642202"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2026.2642202","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICAL ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Ethics review of research and innovation activities face growing challenges due to rapid scientific and technological advances, interdisciplinary research, and wider societal implications, such as environmental impacts and value conflicts.

Methods: To promote more adaptive and robust governance, we conducted a scoping review of tools and frameworks developed to enhance ethics review.

Results: A systematic search of Scopus and Web of Science identified 39 relevant publications describing conceptual and practical ethics tools, including scenario-based planning, ethical matrices, anticipatory governance frameworks, participatory deliberation models, decision-support protocols, and computational approaches. These tools were applied across domains such as artificial intelligence, genomics, conservation, and public health. Key themes included early-stage ethics integration, participatory engagement, managing value conflicts, and addressing uncertainty. The tools were mapped within a two-dimensional matrix describing variations in engagement (expert-driven vs. participatory) and temporal orientation (reactive vs. anticipatory), illustrating a shift toward anticipatory and participatory approaches.

Conclusions: These findings indicate a move from static, checklist-based reviews to dynamic, participatory, and forward-looking ethics governance.

查看原文本刊更多论文

加强伦理审查的伦理工具：范围审查。

背景：由于科学技术的快速进步、跨学科研究和更广泛的社会影响（如环境影响和价值冲突），研究和创新活动的伦理审查面临越来越大的挑战。方法：为了促进更具适应性和健壮性的治理，我们对为加强伦理审查而开发的工具和框架进行了范围审查。结果：通过对Scopus和Web of Science的系统搜索，发现了39篇描述概念和实用伦理工具的相关出版物，包括基于场景的规划、伦理矩阵、预期治理框架、参与式审议模型、决策支持协议和计算方法。这些工具被应用于人工智能、基因组学、保护和公共卫生等领域。关键主题包括早期伦理整合、参与性参与、管理价值冲突和解决不确定性。这些工具被映射到一个二维矩阵中，描述了参与（专家驱动vs参与式）和时间取向（反应性vs预见性）的变化，说明了向预见性和参与性方法的转变。结论：这些发现表明，从静态的、基于清单的审查转向动态的、参与性的、前瞻性的伦理治理。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance MEDICAL ETHICS-

CiteScore

4.90

自引率

14.70%

发文量

审稿时长

>12 weeks

期刊介绍： Accountability in Research: Policies and Quality Assurance is devoted to the examination and critical analysis of systems for maximizing integrity in the conduct of research. It provides an interdisciplinary, international forum for the development of ethics, procedures, standards policies, and concepts to encourage the ethical conduct of research and to enhance the validity of research results. The journal welcomes views on advancing the integrity of research in the fields of general and multidisciplinary sciences, medicine, law, economics, statistics, management studies, public policy, politics, sociology, history, psychology, philosophy, ethics, and information science. All submitted manuscripts are subject to initial appraisal by the Editor, and if found suitable for further consideration, to peer review by independent, anonymous expert referees.