ArticleBulletin of the World Health Organization2020
Defining ethical standards for the application of digital tools to population health research.
Article in Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ethical issues raised by artificial intelligence and big data in population health: a scoping review.Frontiers in sociology · 2025Pooled it
- Ethics dumping in artificial intelligence.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2024Article
- Ethical and legal considerations in social media research for health technology assessment: conclusions from a scoping review.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2023Article
- The Role of Artificial Intelligence Model Documentation in Translational Science: Scoping Review.Interactive journal of medical research · 2023Article
- Iranian researchers' perspective about concept and effect of open science on research publication.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Specific challenges posed by artificial intelligence in research ethics.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2023Review
- Digital financial and banking competition network: Evidence from China.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Speeding up to keep up: exploring the use of AI in the research process.AI & society · 2022Article
- Boundaries Between Research Ethics and Ethical Research Use in Artificial Intelligence Health Research.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2021Article
- What Makes Artificial Intelligence Exceptional in Health Technology Assessment?Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2021Review
- Responsible Open Science: Moving towards an Ethics of Environmental Sustainability.Publications (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Continuous physiological monitoring using wearable technology to inform individual management of infectious diseases, public health and outbreak responses.International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases · 2020Review
- Balancing risks and benefits of artificial intelligence in the health sector.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is growing interest in population health research, which uses methods based on artificial intelligence. Such research draws on a range of clinical and non-clinical data to make predictions about health risks, such as identifying epidemics and monitoring disease spread. Much of this research uses data from social media in the public domain or anonymous secondary health data and is therefore exempt from ethics committee scrutiny. While the ethical use and regulation of digital-based research has been discussed, little attention has been given to the ethics governance of such research in higher education institutions in the field of population health. Such governance is essential to how scholars make ethical decisions and provides assurance to the public that researchers are acting ethically. We propose a process of ethics governance for population health research in higher education institutions. The approach takes the form of review after the research has been completed, with particular focus on the role artificial intelligence algorithms play in augmenting decision-making. The first layer of review could be national, open-science repositories for open-source algorithms and affiliated data or information which are developed during research. The second layer would be a sector-specific validation of the research processes and algorithms by a committee of academics and stakeholders with a wide range of expertise across disciplines. The committee could be created as an off-shoot of an already functioning national oversight body or health technology assessment organization. We use case studies of good practice to explore how this process might operate.
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.