Cargando…

Self-tests for influenza: an empirical ethics investigation

BACKGROUND: In this article we aim to assess the ethical desirability of self-test diagnostic kits for influenza, focusing in particular on the potential benefits and challenges posed by a new, mobile phone-based tool currently being developed by i-sense, an interdisciplinary research collaboration...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rumbold, Benedict, Wenham, Clare, Wilson, James
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5420160/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28476115
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-017-0192-y
_version_ 1783234359573086208
author Rumbold, Benedict
Wenham, Clare
Wilson, James
author_facet Rumbold, Benedict
Wenham, Clare
Wilson, James
author_sort Rumbold, Benedict
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In this article we aim to assess the ethical desirability of self-test diagnostic kits for influenza, focusing in particular on the potential benefits and challenges posed by a new, mobile phone-based tool currently being developed by i-sense, an interdisciplinary research collaboration based (primarily) at University College London and funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council. METHODS: Our study adopts an empirical ethics approach, supplementing an initial review into the ethical considerations posed by such technologies with qualitative data from three focus groups. RESULTS: Overall, we map a range of possible considerations both for and against the use of such technologies, synthesizing evidence from a range of secondary literature, as well as identifying several new considerations previously overlooked. CONCLUSIONS: We argue that no single consideration marks these technologies as either entirely permissible or impermissible but rather tools which have the potential to incur certain costs and benefits, and that context is important in determining these. In the latter stages of the article, we explain how developers of such technologies might seek to mitigate such costs and reflect on the possible limitations of the empirical ethics method brought out during the study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12910-017-0192-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5420160
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54201602017-05-08 Self-tests for influenza: an empirical ethics investigation Rumbold, Benedict Wenham, Clare Wilson, James BMC Med Ethics Research Article BACKGROUND: In this article we aim to assess the ethical desirability of self-test diagnostic kits for influenza, focusing in particular on the potential benefits and challenges posed by a new, mobile phone-based tool currently being developed by i-sense, an interdisciplinary research collaboration based (primarily) at University College London and funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council. METHODS: Our study adopts an empirical ethics approach, supplementing an initial review into the ethical considerations posed by such technologies with qualitative data from three focus groups. RESULTS: Overall, we map a range of possible considerations both for and against the use of such technologies, synthesizing evidence from a range of secondary literature, as well as identifying several new considerations previously overlooked. CONCLUSIONS: We argue that no single consideration marks these technologies as either entirely permissible or impermissible but rather tools which have the potential to incur certain costs and benefits, and that context is important in determining these. In the latter stages of the article, we explain how developers of such technologies might seek to mitigate such costs and reflect on the possible limitations of the empirical ethics method brought out during the study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12910-017-0192-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-05-05 /pmc/articles/PMC5420160/ /pubmed/28476115 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-017-0192-y Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Rumbold, Benedict
Wenham, Clare
Wilson, James
Self-tests for influenza: an empirical ethics investigation
title Self-tests for influenza: an empirical ethics investigation
title_full Self-tests for influenza: an empirical ethics investigation
title_fullStr Self-tests for influenza: an empirical ethics investigation
title_full_unstemmed Self-tests for influenza: an empirical ethics investigation
title_short Self-tests for influenza: an empirical ethics investigation
title_sort self-tests for influenza: an empirical ethics investigation
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5420160/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28476115
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-017-0192-y
work_keys_str_mv AT rumboldbenedict selftestsforinfluenzaanempiricalethicsinvestigation
AT wenhamclare selftestsforinfluenzaanempiricalethicsinvestigation
AT wilsonjames selftestsforinfluenzaanempiricalethicsinvestigation