2020
DOI: 10.1177/1073110520917027
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Ethical Considerations in the Conduct of Unregulated mHealth Research: Expert Perspectives

Abstract: To assist in resolving ethical questions surrounding unregulated mHealth research, we conducted in-depth qualitative interviews with experts from four key stakeholder groups: patient/research advocates, researchers, regulatory professionals, and mobile app/device developers. They discussed challenges and potential solutions in the context of two hypothetical scenarios involving unregulated mHealth research, including notifications/permissions for research use of mHealth data, data access procedures, new primar… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

2
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Notwithstanding this important preference for the return of individual results, many underlined the associated challenges, including the interpretation of results by the individual participants [127,146,152], and to a lesser extent, the risk of breach of confidentiality [150]. In addition, other factors seemed to influence preferences regarding the return of individual results, such as whether the medical condition was rare [76]; whether a health professional would be available to explain the results [69]; whether it had been agreed upon at the time of initial consent [81,91,163] (eg, at time of broad consent in the context of a biobank); whether there would be sharing of data with third parties [97], in particular those belonging to nonregulated, nonresearch settings [81]; and whether there might be logistical hurdles or excessive use of resources [146,152,170]. Indeed, many biobank participants may be primarily driven by altruistic motives and do not wish to allocate excessive resources to the return of results [83].…”
Section: Information On Results From Individual Testsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Notwithstanding this important preference for the return of individual results, many underlined the associated challenges, including the interpretation of results by the individual participants [127,146,152], and to a lesser extent, the risk of breach of confidentiality [150]. In addition, other factors seemed to influence preferences regarding the return of individual results, such as whether the medical condition was rare [76]; whether a health professional would be available to explain the results [69]; whether it had been agreed upon at the time of initial consent [81,91,163] (eg, at time of broad consent in the context of a biobank); whether there would be sharing of data with third parties [97], in particular those belonging to nonregulated, nonresearch settings [81]; and whether there might be logistical hurdles or excessive use of resources [146,152,170]. Indeed, many biobank participants may be primarily driven by altruistic motives and do not wish to allocate excessive resources to the return of results [83].…”
Section: Information On Results From Individual Testsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…• Who: identity of data overseers [11,31,41,49,53,76,83,85,98,[100][101][102]115] and data users [11,31,33,34,36, about biobanking generally centered around the control and ownership of biological [11,31,52,[73][74][75][76][77][79][80][81]86,91,113,114,[40][41][42]49,[52][53][54]57,59,60, samples and data, especially with respect to potential misuse by insurers, the government and other third parties" (Joly et al [64] on the views of members of the public). 117,118] • "I'm just trying to say there is this framework, you know we say that there is a governance system in place which will protect the patient and we can look at them…”
Section: Information On Data Governancementioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…• Patient and research participant advocates ("Advocate") • Researchers who are integrating mHealth technologies into their studies, including independent researchers and citizen scientists ("Researcher") • Regulatory and policy professionals ("Regulatory") • App and device developers ("Developer") Data collection and analysis are described in detail elsewhere in this issue. 5 In brief: Based on our knowledge of the issues and in consultation with the larger research team, we developed, pilot tested, and finalized a semi-structured interview guide centered around hypothetical scenarios involving two commercial mHealth apps collecting health, behavioral, and other data which may be shared for various purposes including research. Here we report findings in response to the following question:…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%