Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27995447›Full record

ArticleScience and engineering ethics2017

Ethics, Nanobiosensors and Elite Sport: The Need for a New Governance Framework.

Robert Evans, Michael McNamee, Owen Guy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Science and engineering ethics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Robert EvansCollege of Engineering, Swansea University, Bay Campus, Fabian Way, Swansea, SA1 8EN, UK. Robert.Henryevans@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-2466-615X
Michael McNameeCollege of Engineering, Swansea University, Bay Campus, Fabian Way, Swansea, SA1 8EN, UK.
Owen GuyCollege of Engineering, Swansea University, Bay Campus, Fabian Way, Swansea, SA1 8EN, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Individual athletes, coaches and sports teams seek continuously for ways to improve performance and accomplishment in elite competition. New techniques of performance analysis are a crucial part of the drive for athletic perfection. This paper discusses the ethical importance of one aspect of the future potential of performance analysis in sport, combining the field of biomedicine, sports engineering and nanotechnology in the form of 'Nanobiosensors'. This innovative technology has the potential to revolutionise sport, enabling real time biological data to be collected from athletes that can be electronically distributed. Enabling precise real time performance analysis is not without ethical problems. Arguments concerning (1) data ownership and privacy; (2) data confidentiality; and (3) athlete welfare are presented alongside a discussion of the use of the Precautionary Principle in making ethical evaluations. We conclude, that although the future potential use of Nanobiosensors in sports analysis offers many potential benefits, there is also a fear that it could be abused at a sporting system level. Hence, it is essential for sporting bodies to consider the development of a robust ethically informed governance framework in advance of their proliferated use.

Indexed as

AthletesBiosensing TechniquesConfidentialityData CollectionHumansInventionsPrivacySocial Control, FormalSportsData privacyEthicsNanomedicineNanotechnologySportSports engineering

Identifiers

PMID27995447
PMCPMC5705729

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.