ReviewBMC medical ethics2021
The social licence for data-intensive health research: towards co-creation, public value and trust.
Review in BMC medical ethics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 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
37 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Patient Co-Creation Initiatives in the Ambulatory Care Setting during COVID-19: A Systematic Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Pooled it
- Consumer Perspectives on Trust in and Benefits of Artificial Intelligence in Health Care.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence in healthcare: a qualitative study exploring consumer perspectives.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Navigating Privacy in Health Data Sharing: A Patient-Centric Approach to Health Information Exchange.Healthcare management forum · 2026Article
- Identifying aspects of palliative and end-of-life care that are most important to people with lived experience and can be measured using routine data: a series of patient and public involvement workshops.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2026Article
- "Doing no harm" in the digital age: navigating tradeoffs and operational considerations for privacy-preserving deep learning in medicine.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- A survey of public attitudes toward secondary research governance oversight: Evidence from Singapore's TRUST platform.International journal of population data science · 2026Article
- Indigenous people's perspectives on sharing health data for service delivery purposes: an inquiry using Indigenous methodologies.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2025Article
- Towards responsible surveillance in preventive health data-AI research.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
- Augmenting research consent: should large language models (LLMs) be used for informed consent to clinical research?Research ethics · 2025Article
- Combining Real-World and Clinical Trial Data Through Privacy-Preserving Record Linkage: Opportunities and Challenges-A Narrative Review.Health science reports · 2025Article
- Worldwide willingness to share health data high but privacy, consent and transparency paramount, a meta-analysis.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Considerations for mRNA Product Development, Regulation and Deployment Across the Lifecycle.Vaccines · 2025Review
- A novel protocol for a "Citizen Panel" for diverse Public and Participant Involvement in the review and development of the process to access data in the UK Longitudinal Linkage Collaboration Trusted Research Environment.International journal of population data science · 2025Article
- Emerging and evolving values in the changing landscape of genomics.Frontiers in genetics · 2025Article
- Discussing Data: A UK-wide public consultation on the use of low fidelity synthetic data for research.International journal of population data science · 2025Article
- Public Involvement and Engagement in Big Data Research: Scoping Review.Journal of participatory medicine · 2024Article
- Consumer Health Informatics to Advance Precision Prevention.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2024Review
- Article
- Ethical and social reflections on the proposed European Health Data Space.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe rise of Big Data-driven health research challenges the assumed contribution of medical research to the public good, raising questions about whether the status of such research as a common good should be taken for granted, and how public trust can be preserved. Scandals arising out of sharing data during medical research have pointed out that going beyond the requirements of law may be necessary for sustaining trust in data-intensive health research. We propose building upon the use of a social licence for achieving such ethical governance. MAIN TEXT: We performed a narrative review of the social licence as presented in the biomedical literature. We used a systematic search and selection process, followed by a critical conceptual analysis. The systematic search resulted in nine publications. Our conceptual analysis aims to clarify how societal permission can be granted to health research projects which rely upon the reuse and/or linkage of health data. These activities may be morally demanding. For these types of activities, a moral legitimation, beyond the limits of law, may need to be sought in order to preserve trust. Our analysis indicates that a social licence encourages us to recognise a broad range of stakeholder interests and perspectives in data-intensive health research. This is especially true for patients contributing data. Incorporating such a practice paves the way towards an ethical governance, based upon trust. Public engagement that involves patients from the start is called for to strengthen this social licence.
conclusionsThere are several merits to using the concept of social licence as a guideline for ethical governance. Firstly, it fits the novel scale of data-related risks; secondly, it focuses attention on trustworthiness; and finally, it offers co-creation as a way forward. Greater trust can be achieved in the governance of data-intensive health research by highlighting strategic dialogue with both patients contributing the data, and the public in general. This should ultimately contribute to a more ethical practice of governance.
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.