健康相关大数据研究的伦理考量。

IF 0.3 Q4 ETHICS
Polychronis Voultsos
{"title":"健康相关大数据研究的伦理考量。","authors":"Polychronis Voultsos","doi":"10.30444/CB.153","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As health-related big data research (HRBDR) has drastically increased over the last years due to the rapid development of big data analytics, a range of important ethical issues are raised. In this study, a systematic literature review was conducted. Several and interesting results emerged from this review. The term ″big data″ has not yet been clearly defined. The already existing ethical principles and concepts need to be revisited in the new HRBDR context. Traditional research ethics notions like privacy and informed consent are to be reconsidered. HRBDR creates new ethical issues such those related to trust / trustworthiness and public values such as reciprocity, transparency, inclusivity and common good. The implementation of dynamic consent rather than broad consent is currently highlighted as the more satisfying solution. Ethical review committees in their current form are ill-suited to provide exclusive ethical oversight on HRBDR projects. Expanding Ethical Review Committees' purview and members' expertise, as well as creating novel oversight bodies by promoting a co-governance system including public and all the stakeholders involved are strongly recommended. The mechanism of ″social licence″, that is, informal permissions granted to researchers by society, can serve as a guideline. High-stakes decisions are often made under uncertainty. Machine learning algorithms are highly complex and in some cases opaque, and may yield biased decisions or discrimination. Improved interdisciplinary dialogue along with considering aspects like auditing, benchmarking, confidence / trust and explainability /interpretability may address concerns about HRBDR ethics. Finally and most importantly, research ethics shifts towards a population-based model of ethics.","PeriodicalId":42510,"journal":{"name":"Cuadernos de Bioetica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ethical considerations surrounding health-related big data research.\",\"authors\":\"Polychronis Voultsos\",\"doi\":\"10.30444/CB.153\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"As health-related big data research (HRBDR) has drastically increased over the last years due to the rapid development of big data analytics, a range of important ethical issues are raised. In this study, a systematic literature review was conducted. Several and interesting results emerged from this review. The term ″big data″ has not yet been clearly defined. The already existing ethical principles and concepts need to be revisited in the new HRBDR context. Traditional research ethics notions like privacy and informed consent are to be reconsidered. HRBDR creates new ethical issues such those related to trust / trustworthiness and public values such as reciprocity, transparency, inclusivity and common good. The implementation of dynamic consent rather than broad consent is currently highlighted as the more satisfying solution. Ethical review committees in their current form are ill-suited to provide exclusive ethical oversight on HRBDR projects. Expanding Ethical Review Committees' purview and members' expertise, as well as creating novel oversight bodies by promoting a co-governance system including public and all the stakeholders involved are strongly recommended. The mechanism of ″social licence″, that is, informal permissions granted to researchers by society, can serve as a guideline. High-stakes decisions are often made under uncertainty. Machine learning algorithms are highly complex and in some cases opaque, and may yield biased decisions or discrimination. Improved interdisciplinary dialogue along with considering aspects like auditing, benchmarking, confidence / trust and explainability /interpretability may address concerns about HRBDR ethics. Finally and most importantly, research ethics shifts towards a population-based model of ethics.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42510,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cuadernos de Bioetica\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cuadernos de Bioetica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.30444/CB.153\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cuadernos de Bioetica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30444/CB.153","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

由于大数据分析的快速发展,健康相关的大数据研究(HRBDR)在过去几年中急剧增加,因此提出了一系列重要的伦理问题。在本研究中,进行了系统的文献综述。这篇综述得出了一些有趣的结果。“大数据”一词尚未明确定义。需要在新的HRBDR背景下重新审视现有的伦理原则和概念。隐私和知情同意等传统的研究伦理观念需要重新考虑。HRBDR创造了新的道德问题,如与信任/可信度和公共价值观有关的问题,如互惠、透明、包容性和共同利益。目前强调,实施动态同意而不是广泛同意是更令人满意的解决方案。目前形式的道德审查委员会不适合对HRBDR项目进行专门的道德监督。强烈建议扩大道德审查委员会的职权范围和成员的专业知识,并通过促进包括公众和所有相关利益攸关方在内的共同治理体系来创建新的监督机构。“社会许可”机制,即社会授予研究人员的非正式许可,可以作为指导。高风险决策往往是在不确定的情况下做出的。机器学习算法非常复杂,在某些情况下不透明,可能会产生有偏见的决策或歧视。改进跨学科对话,同时考虑审计、基准、信心/信任和可解释性/可解释性等方面,可以解决对HRBDR道德的担忧。最后也是最重要的一点是,研究伦理向基于人群的伦理模式转变。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Ethical considerations surrounding health-related big data research.
As health-related big data research (HRBDR) has drastically increased over the last years due to the rapid development of big data analytics, a range of important ethical issues are raised. In this study, a systematic literature review was conducted. Several and interesting results emerged from this review. The term ″big data″ has not yet been clearly defined. The already existing ethical principles and concepts need to be revisited in the new HRBDR context. Traditional research ethics notions like privacy and informed consent are to be reconsidered. HRBDR creates new ethical issues such those related to trust / trustworthiness and public values such as reciprocity, transparency, inclusivity and common good. The implementation of dynamic consent rather than broad consent is currently highlighted as the more satisfying solution. Ethical review committees in their current form are ill-suited to provide exclusive ethical oversight on HRBDR projects. Expanding Ethical Review Committees' purview and members' expertise, as well as creating novel oversight bodies by promoting a co-governance system including public and all the stakeholders involved are strongly recommended. The mechanism of ″social licence″, that is, informal permissions granted to researchers by society, can serve as a guideline. High-stakes decisions are often made under uncertainty. Machine learning algorithms are highly complex and in some cases opaque, and may yield biased decisions or discrimination. Improved interdisciplinary dialogue along with considering aspects like auditing, benchmarking, confidence / trust and explainability /interpretability may address concerns about HRBDR ethics. Finally and most importantly, research ethics shifts towards a population-based model of ethics.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
20.00%
发文量
5
期刊介绍: La revista Cuadernos de Bioética, órgano oficial de la Asociación Española de Bioética y Ética Médica, publica cuatrimestralmente artículos y recensiones bibliográficas sobre todas las áreas de la bioética: fundamentación, ética de la investigación, bioética clínica, biojurídica, etc. Estos proceden de los aceptados en la revisión tutelada por los editores de la revista como de otros que por encargo el comité editorial solicite a sus autores. La edicion de la revista se financia con las aportaciones de los socios de AEBI.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信