ArticleAJOB empirical bioethics
Advancing a Data Justice Framework for Public Health Surveillance.
Article in AJOB empirical bioethics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Towards responsible surveillance in preventive health data-AI research.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
- Ethics of Identifying Individuals Involved in HIV Transmission Events by Phylogenetics in Molecular Surveillance.Bioethics · 2025Article
- Health-Related Stigma: The Affordances of Electronic Health Management Systems in the Production of Structural Stigma.Sociology of health & illness · 2025Article
- Exploring the benefits of participatory action research to a participatory data stewardship community project: the Round 'Ere case study on data and well-being.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
- LGBTQ+ cancer: priority or lip service? A qualitative content analysis of LGBTQ+ considerations in U.S. state, jurisdiction, and tribal comprehensive cancer control plans.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2024Article
- Health policy counterpublics: Enacting collective resistances to US molecular HIV surveillance and cluster detection and response programs.Social studies of science · 2024Article
- The application of artificial intelligence in health policy: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Advancing Dialogue About Consent and Molecular HIV Surveillance in the United States: Four Proposals Following a Federal Advisory Panel's Call for Major Reforms.The Milbank quarterly · 2023Article
- Botswana tuberculosis (TB) stakeholders broadly support scaling up next-generation whole genome sequencing: Ethical and practical considerations for Botswana and global health.PLOS global public health · 2023Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBioethical debates about privacy, big data, and public health surveillance have not sufficiently engaged the perspectives of those being surveilled. The data justice framework suggests that big data applications have the potential to create disproportionate harm for socially marginalized groups. Using examples from our research on HIV surveillance for individuals incarcerated in jails, we analyze ethical issues in deploying big data in public health surveillance.
methodsWe conducted qualitative, semi-structured interviews with 24 people living with HIV who had been previously incarcerated in county jails about their perspectives on and experiences with HIV surveillance, as part of a larger study to characterize ethical considerations in leveraging big data techniques to enhance continuity of care for incarcerated people living with HIV.
resultsMost participants expressed support for the state health department tracking HIV testing results and viral load data. Several viewed HIV surveillance as a violation of privacy, and several had actively avoided contact from state public health outreach workers. Participants were most likely to express reservations about surveillance when they viewed the state's motives as self-interested. Perspectives highlight the mistrust that structurally vulnerable people may have in the state's capacity to act as an agent of welfare. Findings suggest that adopting a nuanced, context-sensitive view on surveillance is essential.
conclusionsEstablishing trustworthiness through interpersonal interactions with public health personnel is important to reversing historical legacies of harm to racial minorities and structurally vulnerable groups. Empowering stakeholders to participate in the design and implementation of data infrastructure and governance is critical for advancing a data justice agenda, and can offset privacy concerns. The next steps in advancing the data justice framework in public health surveillance will be to innovate ways to represent the voices of structurally vulnerable groups in the design and governance of big data initiatives.
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.