ArticleFrontiers in genetics2026
Digital death and posthumous data: a glocal, relational perspective.
Article in Frontiers in genetics, 2026. 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Persistent digital presence now routinely outlives biological death through memorialized profiles, algorithmic "memories," AI-mediated avatars, or biobank reanalysis. This perspective argues that decisions about such posthumous data-including postmortem genomic data-should be grounded in a glocally situated, relational view of personhood and practice, rather than in one-size-fits-all, individual-only rules. A small shared vocabulary is first proposed for use across disciplines: digital afterlife, digital immortality, posthumous lifespan, digital remains, and digital death. Digital death is treated phenomenologically as a lived, relational process: a hybrid online-offline experience in which dying, mourning, remembrance, and legacy unfold across digital and non-digital contexts. Second, it is argued that selves persist through relations, roles, and traces and that digital and genomic data amplify this relationality. Posthumous decisions, therefore, affect kin and communities and call for relational, kin-sensitive consent rather than static, individual authorizations. Third, a glocal lens is advanced: digital and data infrastructures always meet local death systems-institutions, rites, beliefs, and moral orders-that refract global capabilities into self-limiting "boundary solutions." To make this usable for genetics and allied fields, a brief action triage is outlined-focusing on stakes, relational radius, local death system, and time frame-and illustrate with a posthumous variant re-analysis/return-of-results scenario to help choose the least intrusive viable pathway. While approximate, such staged, glocally attuned practice can reduce foreseeable harm and support ethically coherent, clinically workable, and culturally credible uses of posthumous data.
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.