ArticleBMC medical ethics2022
Ethics framework for citizen science and public and patient participation in research.
Article in BMC medical ethics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 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
29 citing papers in PubMed, 64 citations in OpenAlex.
- Public engagement professionals: Exploring ethical tensions in communication, engagement and co-creation.Public understanding of science (Bristol, England) · 2026Article
- Translational human gut microbiome research: What are the missing pieces of the puzzle?Journal of translational medicine · 2026Review
- Evaluation and lessons learned regarding Public Involvement: a panel advising on an Alzheimer's disease and related dementia cohort study.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- New technologies for identification and surveillance of Chagas disease vectors.Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical · 2026Review
- Article
- "Scientific or democratic?" Bridging the implementation gap of citizen science through the study of social-symbolic objects.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Perspective on patient and non-academic partner engagement for the responsible integration of large language models in health chatbots.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- 'Making little ethical decisions all the time': examining an ethical framework for consumer and community involvement in research, a co-produced ethnographic study.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- Patient and Public Involvement with Forced Migrants: An Empirical Exploration of Ethical Issues.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2025Article
- Biomedical data repositories require governance for artificial intelligence/machine learning applications at every step.JAMIA open · 2025Article
- A Qualitative Study of the Ethics of Community Scientists' Role in Environmental Health Research from the Perspective of Community Scientists and Institutional Review Board Staff.Environmental health perspectives · 2025Article
- Ethical integration of citizen science and youth participatory action research: insights from the YouthChronic project.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Ethical Design of Data-Driven Decision Support Tools for Improving Cancer Care: Embedded Ethics Review of the 4D PICTURE Project.JMIR cancer · 2025Review
- Navigating in a value-driven practice: a study of a Dutch Recovery College as a learning, social, and organizational space.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- The meaning of ethical collaborative research according to young people.International journal of adolescence and youth · 2025Article
- Data Hazards as An Ethical Toolkit for Neuroscience.Neuroethics · 2025Article
- How can digital citizen science approaches improve ethical smartphone use surveillance among youth: Traditional surveys versus ecological momentary assessments.PLOS digital health · 2024Article
- Ethics of research engagement with Deaf people. A qualitative evidence synthesis.Journal of deaf studies and deaf education · 2024Review
- An auto-ethnographic study of co-produced health research in a patient organisation: unpacking the good, the bad, and the unspoken.Research involvement and engagement · 2024Article
- Diverse sources of normativity in open science and their implications for ethical governance.Royal Society open science · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCitizen science and models for public participation in health research share normative ideals of participation, inclusion, and public and patient engagement. Academic researchers collaborate in research with members of the public involved in an issue, maximizing all involved assets, competencies, and knowledge. In citizen science new ethical issues arise, such as who decides, who participates, who is excluded, what it means to share power equally, or whose knowledge counts. This article aims to present an ethics framework that offers a lens of understanding and heuristic guidelines to deal with ethical issues in citizen science.
methodsWe conducted seven case studies between 2015 and 2021 to attune and validate the ethics framework for the context of citizen science. The cases related to studies with older adults, people with a psychiatric vulnerability, people dependent on community care, people who are unemployed or living in poverty or both, and young adults with respiratory disease.
resultsEthics in citizen science reaches beyond the ethical issues in traditional biomedical and health research. It entails more than following procedures about informed consent and privacy and submitting a proposal to a Medical Research Ethics Committee. Ethics in citizen science relates to everyday ethical issues during the study, including relational and moral complexities concerning collaboration, sharing power, and democratic decision-making. Dealing with these issues requires ethics work of researchers. This entails seeing ethically salient issues and reflecting on everyday ethical issues. Ethics work consists of seven features: framing work, role work, emotion work, identity work, reason work, relationship work, and performance work. All are relevant for researchers in citizen science.
conclusionsEthical issues in citizen science often relate to power differentials, partnership, and collaboration between academics and non-academics. The ethics framework prepares researchers for the work needed in citizen science to act responsibly and offers a heuristic guide to reflect on ethics. Reflection on ethics is a pathway towards ethical citizen science, especially if researchers collaboratively reflect in partnership with non-academics who are subject to the moral issue.
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.