ArticleBMC medical ethics2025
Qualitative study on ethics in paediatric Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) research: perspectives of Turkish legal guardians.
Article in BMC medical ethics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis qualitative study of the opinions of legal guardians of minors with Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) in Turkey identifies and analyses the ethical challenges accompanying the management of paediatric SIRS patients and the collection of genetic data as part of a large multiomics dataset for the development of an AI-based tool for diagnostics and management of SIRS.
methodsBetween January and June 2024, 14 problem-centred, semi-structured exploratory interviews with legal guardians of children with SIRS were conducted in Istanbul, Turkey. The interview consisted of 19 open-ended questions. The interviews were digitally recorded, translated into English, and two independent researchers analysed the content of the information. Qualitative content and thematic analysis were performed to identify major ethical issues.
resultsThe analysis identified five major topics: solidarity, autonomy, informed consent, protection of privacy, and AI-driven ethical issues. Solidarity was the most prominent topic and encompassed the aspects of motivation for participation, raising awareness, supporting communication, and loosening data protection. Parents expressed high respect for children’s autonomy. In the vein of the triadic relationship model, the necessity of children with SIRS participating in decision-making was supported by the interviewees as well as the reconfirmation of informed consent in case of future use of collected genetic data. Regarding the development of AI-tool for SIRS, five principles were identified: wide representation, confidentiality, trustworthiness, human control, and orientation.
conclusionOur study contributes to the understanding of the ethical challenges accompanying the study of diagnostics using multi-omics data and derived treatment strategies of SIRS in children and adolescents. Different functions of solidarity linked it to the other major topics, thus composing a coherent picture of the ethical aspects of paediatric SIRS research. The identified principles of AI-development correspond to those in the Assessment List for Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence (ALTAI); thus, our research confirmed their real-life relevance and usefulness.
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.