ArticleJournal of medical ethics2019
Meeting the needs of underserved populations: setting the agenda for more inclusive citizen science of medicine.
Article in Journal of medical ethics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
28 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Charting exposomethics: a roadmap for the ethical foundations of the human exposome project.Human genomics · 2026Review
- The ethics of using virtual assistants to help people in vulnerable positions access care.Journal of medical ethics · 2025Article
- Can the Development of Orphan Drugs Include Wider Patient Engagement? A Citizens' Jury to Explore a Promissory Notion.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Amplifying the Voices of Youth for Equity in Wellness and Technology Research: Reflections on the Midwest Youth Wellness Initiative on Technology (MYWIT) Youth Advisory Board.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2025Article
- Citizen science approaches in the development of post-stroke physical activity interventions: A scoping review.PloS one · 2025Article
- Citizen science as an instrument for women's health research.Nature medicine · 2024Article
- Community-Partnered Research appraisal tool for conducting, reporting and assessing community-based research.BMJ open · 2024Review
- Young people in iNaturalist: a blended learning framework for biodiversity monitoring.International journal of science education. Part B. Communication and public engagement · 2024Article
- Improving shared decision-making about cancer treatment through design-based data-driven decision-support tools and redesigning care paths: an overview of the 4D PICTURE project.Palliative care and social practice · 2024Article
- Article
- Is there a role for citizen science in death and dying research?Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Modeling intrinsic factors of inclusive engagement in citizen science: Insights from the participants' survey analysis of CSI-COP.PloS one · 2023Article
- Exploring Black and South Asian women's experiences of help-seeking and engagement in perinatal mental health services in the UK.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Article
- Gamete and embryo donation for research: what might shape the willingness to donate among gamete donors and recipients?Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2022Article
- Online Community and Citizen Science supports environmental science learning by young people.Computers & education · 2022Article
- Article
- Ethical Issues in Social Media Recruitment for Clinical Studies: Ethical Analysis and Framework.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Review
- Article
- A Citizen Science Approach to Identifying Indoor Environmental Barriers to Optimal Health for under 5s Experiencing Homelessness in Temporary Accommodation.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In its expansion to genomic, epidemiological and biomedical research, citizen science has been promoted as contributing to the democratisation of medical research and healthcare. At the same time, it has been criticised for reinforcing patterns of exclusion in health and biomedicine, and sometimes even creating new ones. Although citizen science has the potential to make biomedical research more inclusive, the benefits of current citizen science initiatives are not equally accessible for all people-in particular those who are resource-poor, located outside of traditional networks of healthcare services, or members of minorities and marginalised groups. In view of growing public investments in participatory research endeavours, we argue that it should be considered more explicitly if, and how, citizen science could help make research more inclusive, contribute to the public good, and possibly even lead to better and more equitable healthcare. Reflecting on emerging ethical concerns for scientific conduct and best medical practice, we propose a set of relevant considerations for researchers, practitioners, bioethicists, funders and participants who seek to advance ethical practices of citizen-led health initiatives, and address profound differences in position, privilege and power in research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.