The Role of Social Value in Data-Intensive Health Research.

IF 2.3 2区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS
Bioethics Pub Date : 2026-07-16 DOI:10.1111/bioe.70159
Tessa I van Rijssel, Sam H A Muller, Marianne Boenink, Johannes J M van Delden
{"title":"The Role of Social Value in Data-Intensive Health Research.","authors":"Tessa I van Rijssel, Sam H A Muller, Marianne Boenink, Johannes J M van Delden","doi":"10.1111/bioe.70159","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Data-intensive health research complicates traditional requirements for informed consent, due to the amount of data contributors and data points, the open-ended nature of research questions, and repeated or secondary data use. To still enable data-intensive health research, there is a move towards other-generally lower-standards for consent such as opt-out systems, in current developments such as the European Health Data Space (EHDS). This is premised on the social value that data-intensive health research is assumed to provide through advancing research and innovation. Traditionally, social value functions both as a fundamental requirement for research, as well as a ground to justify individual risk in research ethics. However, ongoing debates surrounding data-intensive health research suggest that social value can also be used to justify lower standards of consent. Here, social value seems to obtain an additional and distinct function. This raises questions on the role of social value in research ethics and evaluations of the acceptability of research. In this paper, we examine three possible roles of social value: (i) to prevent research waste and set research priorities; (ii) to justify exposing research participants to risk; and (iii) to lower standards for consent. We discuss the presuppositions underlying these various roles. When social value is invoked to justify lower consent standards, this specifically impacts data contributors' ability to have control over when and how their data are used. Therefore, we propose that this use of social value requires arranging alternative forms of meaningful involvement and control for data contributors.</p>","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.70159","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Data-intensive health research complicates traditional requirements for informed consent, due to the amount of data contributors and data points, the open-ended nature of research questions, and repeated or secondary data use. To still enable data-intensive health research, there is a move towards other-generally lower-standards for consent such as opt-out systems, in current developments such as the European Health Data Space (EHDS). This is premised on the social value that data-intensive health research is assumed to provide through advancing research and innovation. Traditionally, social value functions both as a fundamental requirement for research, as well as a ground to justify individual risk in research ethics. However, ongoing debates surrounding data-intensive health research suggest that social value can also be used to justify lower standards of consent. Here, social value seems to obtain an additional and distinct function. This raises questions on the role of social value in research ethics and evaluations of the acceptability of research. In this paper, we examine three possible roles of social value: (i) to prevent research waste and set research priorities; (ii) to justify exposing research participants to risk; and (iii) to lower standards for consent. We discuss the presuppositions underlying these various roles. When social value is invoked to justify lower consent standards, this specifically impacts data contributors' ability to have control over when and how their data are used. Therefore, we propose that this use of social value requires arranging alternative forms of meaningful involvement and control for data contributors.

社会价值在数据密集型健康研究中的作用。
数据密集型卫生研究使传统的知情同意要求复杂化,原因是数据提供者和数据点数量众多、研究问题的开放性以及重复或二次使用数据。为了继续进行数据密集型的健康研究,在欧洲健康数据空间(EHDS)等当前发展中,有一种向其他通常较低的同意标准(如选择退出系统)迈进的趋势。这是以假定数据密集型卫生研究通过推进研究和创新提供社会价值为前提的。传统上,社会价值既是研究的基本要求,也是在研究伦理中证明个人风险的依据。然而,围绕数据密集型健康研究的持续辩论表明,社会价值也可以用来证明较低的同意标准是合理的。在这里,社会价值似乎获得了一种额外的、独特的功能。这就提出了关于社会价值在研究伦理和研究可接受性评估中的作用的问题。在本文中,我们考察了社会价值的三种可能作用:(i)防止研究浪费和设定研究重点;(ii)证明研究参与者面临风险的合理性;(三)降低同意的标准。我们将讨论这些不同角色背后的前提。当社会价值被用来证明较低的同意标准时,这特别影响了数据提供者控制何时以及如何使用他们的数据的能力。因此,我们建议,这种社会价值的使用需要为数据贡献者安排有意义的参与和控制的替代形式。
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
Bioethics
Bioethics 医学-医学:伦理
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
9.10%
发文量
127
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: As medical technology continues to develop, the subject of bioethics has an ever increasing practical relevance for all those working in philosophy, medicine, law, sociology, public policy, education and related fields. Bioethics provides a forum for well-argued articles on the ethical questions raised by current issues such as: international collaborative clinical research in developing countries; public health; infectious disease; AIDS; managed care; genomics and stem cell research. These questions are considered in relation to concrete ethical, legal and policy problems, or in terms of the fundamental concepts, principles and theories used in discussions of such problems. Bioethics also features regular Background Briefings on important current debates in the field. These feature articles provide excellent material for bioethics scholars, teachers and students alike.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书