Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30487120›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2018

User Perspectives of a Web-Based Data-Sharing Platform (Open Humans) on Ethical Oversight in Participant-Led Research: Protocol for a Quantitative Study.

Marta Fadda, Anna Jobin, Alessandro Blasimme, Bastian Greshake Tzovaras, Mad Price Ball, Effy Vayena

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

6 authors.

Marta FaddaHealth Ethics and Policy Lab, Department of Health Sciences and Technology, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3537-0346
Anna JobinHealth Ethics and Policy Lab, Department of Health Sciences and Technology, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4649-7812
Alessandro BlasimmeHealth Ethics and Policy Lab, Department of Health Sciences and Technology, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5908-2002
Bastian Greshake TzovarasOpen Humans Foundation, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9925-9623
Mad Price BallOpen Humans Foundation, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0544-5925
Effy VayenaHealth Ethics and Policy Lab, Department of Health Sciences and Technology, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1303-5467

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdvances in medicine rely to a great extent on people's willingness to share their data with researchers. With increasingly widespread use of digital technologies, several Web-based communities have emerged aiming to enable their users to share large amounts of data, some of which can possibly be employed for research purposes by scientists, or to conduct participant-led research (PLR). Scholarship has recently addressed the necessity of interrogating how existing ethical standards can and should be applied and adapted in view of the specificities of such Web-based activities. So far, no study has explored participants' beliefs about and attitudes toward ethical oversight when it comes to platforms that involve medical data sharing.

objectiveThis paper presents the protocol for a survey study aimed at understanding users' beliefs about Web-based data-sharing platforms regarding how research ethics principles should be applied in such a setting. Furthermore, the study aims at quantitatively assessing the relationship between participants' perspectives on ethical oversight and other variables such as previous participation in research, beliefs about data sharing, and attitudes toward self-experimentation.

methodsWe are conducting a Web-based survey with users of a popular Web-based data-sharing platform, Open Humans. The survey has been sent to approximately 4640 users registered for the Open Humans newsletter. To fill out the survey, participants need to have an account on Open Humans. We expect a 5%-10% response rate (between 200 and 400 completed surveys out of approximately 4000 survey invitations sent). Independent variables include past data-sharing behavior and intention, beliefs about data sharing, past participation in research, attitudes toward self-experimentation, perceived knowledge of the platform's guidelines and terms, perceived importance of having transparent guidelines, and governance-related beliefs. The main dependent variable is participants' expectations regarding who should ensure that ethical requirements are met within research projects conducted on open data-sharing platforms, based on Emanuel et al's ethical framework. We will use chi-square tests to assess the relationship between participants' expectations regarding ethical oversight and their past behavior, future intentions, beliefs, attitudes, and knowledge.

resultsData collection started on June 13, 2018. A reminder to fill out the survey was sent to participants in mid-July. We expect to gain insights on users' perspectives on the ethical oversight of Web-based data-sharing platforms and on the associated experiences, beliefs, and sociodemographic characteristics.

conclusionsWhen digital tools allow people to engage in PLR including medical data, understanding how people interpret and envision the ethical oversight of their data-sharing practices is crucial. This will be the first study to explore users' perspectives on ethical oversight of Web-based data-sharing platforms. The results will help inform the development of a framework that can be employed for platforms hosting various kinds of research projects to accommodate participants' ethical oversight needs. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/10939.

Indexed as

data sharingethicsmobile phonepatient-generated health datapatient participationquestionnairesurvey

Identifiers

PMID30487120
PMCPMC6291678

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.