条款和条件适用:研究中移动医疗用户协议的伦理分析。

IF 2.5 2区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Luke Gelinas, Walker Morrell, Barbara E Bierer
{"title":"条款和条件适用:研究中移动医疗用户协议的伦理分析。","authors":"Luke Gelinas,&nbsp;Walker Morrell,&nbsp;Barbara E Bierer","doi":"10.1093/jlb/lsad021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Mobile health (mHealth) technologies raise unique risks to user privacy and confidentiality that are often embedded in lengthy and complex Privacy Policies, Terms of Use, and End User License Agreements. We seek to improve the ethical review of these documents ('user agreements') and their risks in research using mHealth technologies by providing a framework for identifying when these risks are research risks, categorizing the key information in these agreements under relevant ethical and regulatory categories, and proposing strategies to mitigate them. MHealth user agreements typically describe the <i>nature of the data</i> collected by mHealth technologies, <i>why or for what purposes</i> user data are collected and shared, <i>who will have access</i> to the different types of data collected, and may include <i>exculpatory language.</i> The risks raised by data collection and sharing typically increase with the sensitivity and identifiability of the data and vary by whether data are shared with researchers, the technology developer, and/or third-party entities. The most important risk mitigation strategy is disclosure of the key information found in user agreements to participants during the research consent process. In addition, researchers should prioritize mHealth technologies with favorable risk-benefit balances.</p>","PeriodicalId":56266,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law and the Biosciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/e5/20/lsad021.PMC10347671.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Terms and conditions apply: an ethical analysis of mobile health user agreements in research.\",\"authors\":\"Luke Gelinas,&nbsp;Walker Morrell,&nbsp;Barbara E Bierer\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jlb/lsad021\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Mobile health (mHealth) technologies raise unique risks to user privacy and confidentiality that are often embedded in lengthy and complex Privacy Policies, Terms of Use, and End User License Agreements. We seek to improve the ethical review of these documents ('user agreements') and their risks in research using mHealth technologies by providing a framework for identifying when these risks are research risks, categorizing the key information in these agreements under relevant ethical and regulatory categories, and proposing strategies to mitigate them. MHealth user agreements typically describe the <i>nature of the data</i> collected by mHealth technologies, <i>why or for what purposes</i> user data are collected and shared, <i>who will have access</i> to the different types of data collected, and may include <i>exculpatory language.</i> The risks raised by data collection and sharing typically increase with the sensitivity and identifiability of the data and vary by whether data are shared with researchers, the technology developer, and/or third-party entities. The most important risk mitigation strategy is disclosure of the key information found in user agreements to participants during the research consent process. In addition, researchers should prioritize mHealth technologies with favorable risk-benefit balances.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56266,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Law and the Biosciences\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/e5/20/lsad021.PMC10347671.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Law and the Biosciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsad021\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law and the Biosciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsad021","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

移动医疗(mHealth)技术对用户隐私和机密性带来了独特的风险,这些风险通常包含在冗长而复杂的隐私政策、使用条款和最终用户许可协议中。我们试图通过提供一个框架来识别这些风险何时是研究风险,将这些协议中的关键信息分类在相关的伦理和监管类别下,并提出缓解这些风险的策略,从而改进对这些文件(“用户协议”)及其在使用移动健康技术的研究中的风险的伦理审查。移动健康用户协议通常描述移动健康技术收集的数据的性质、收集和共享用户数据的原因或目的、谁将有权访问所收集的不同类型的数据,并可能包括免责语言。数据收集和共享带来的风险通常会随着数据的敏感性和可识别性而增加,并因数据是否与研究人员、技术开发人员和/或第三方实体共享而有所不同。最重要的风险缓解战略是在研究同意过程中向参与者披露用户协议中的关键信息。此外,研究人员应该优先考虑具有有利风险-收益平衡的移动医疗技术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Terms and conditions apply: an ethical analysis of mobile health user agreements in research.

Mobile health (mHealth) technologies raise unique risks to user privacy and confidentiality that are often embedded in lengthy and complex Privacy Policies, Terms of Use, and End User License Agreements. We seek to improve the ethical review of these documents ('user agreements') and their risks in research using mHealth technologies by providing a framework for identifying when these risks are research risks, categorizing the key information in these agreements under relevant ethical and regulatory categories, and proposing strategies to mitigate them. MHealth user agreements typically describe the nature of the data collected by mHealth technologies, why or for what purposes user data are collected and shared, who will have access to the different types of data collected, and may include exculpatory language. The risks raised by data collection and sharing typically increase with the sensitivity and identifiability of the data and vary by whether data are shared with researchers, the technology developer, and/or third-party entities. The most important risk mitigation strategy is disclosure of the key information found in user agreements to participants during the research consent process. In addition, researchers should prioritize mHealth technologies with favorable risk-benefit balances.

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
Journal of Law and the Biosciences
Journal of Law and the Biosciences Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
35
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Law and the Biosciences (JLB) is the first fully Open Access peer-reviewed legal journal focused on the advances at the intersection of law and the biosciences. A co-venture between Duke University, Harvard University Law School, and Stanford University, and published by Oxford University Press, this open access, online, and interdisciplinary academic journal publishes cutting-edge scholarship in this important new field. The Journal contains original and response articles, essays, and commentaries on a wide range of topics, including bioethics, neuroethics, genetics, reproductive technologies, stem cells, enhancement, patent law, and food and drug regulation. JLB is published as one volume with three issues per year with new articles posted online on an ongoing basis.
×
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