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.
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.