ArticleInteractive journal of medical research2022
Examining how Ethics in Relation to Health Technology is Described in the Research Literature: Scoping Review.
Article in Interactive journal of medical research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Examining Practices Related to Ethical Aspects in eHealth Evaluation Research: Protocol for a Scoping Review.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- Emerging technologies and research ethics: Developing editorial policy using a scoping review and reference panel.PloS one · 2024Article
- An ethical code for collecting, using and transferring sensitive health data: outcomes of a modified Policy Delphi process in Singapore.BMC medical ethics · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGiven the increased use of technology in health care, both in extent and application, the importance of understanding the ethical implications of new health technologies increases. Profound insight into the possible ethical implications of new health technologies enhances the research and development of such technologies and the likelihood of eventual successful implementation in clinical practice.
objectiveThis study aimed to gain an understanding of how and if researchers focused on health technologies describe the actual or possible ethical aspects of their research findings.
methodsAn established framework for scoping reviews was used to guide the methodology. Studies published in PubMed over the last 10 years were included if they study or refer to ethics in relation to health technology as defined by established frameworks. In total, 14,532 articles were screened, 692 were retained for full-text evaluation, and 227 were included for data extraction.
resultsIn total, 250 (80.9%, N=309) studies were conducted in North America and Europe; literature review studies were dominant. Most studies (52.9%, 120/227) had no direct reference to any of the 4 basic ethical principles: beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy, and justice. In cases where studies referenced ethical theory, consequentialism dominated.
conclusionsWhen research about technology and ethics is published, the predominant focus is on its intent rather than its actual effect on patients. This lack of insight is problematic considering the vast advancement of technology in which ethics cannot keep up with understanding and offer insights on addressing ethical issues. This finding has implications for practice, research, and education.
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.