Dataset Information

Ethics, Integrity and Retributions of Digital Detection Surveillance Systems on Infectious Diseases: Systematic literature review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has raised the importance of the deployment of digital detection surveillance systems to support early warning and monitoring of infectious diseases (ID). These opportunities create a "double-edge sword" as the ethical governance of such approaches often lag behind technological achievements.

Objective

The aim was to investigate ethical issues identified from utilizing AI-augmented surveillance or early warning systems to monitor and detect common or novel ID outbreaks.

Methods

We searched relevant articles in a number of databases that addressed ethical issues of using artificial intelligence, digital surveillance systems, early warning systems and/or big data analytics technology for detecting, monitoring, or tracing ID according to PRISMA guidelines, and further identified and analysed them with a theoretical framework.

Results

This systematic review identified 29 articles presented in six major themes clustered under individual, organizational and societal levels, including: awareness of implementing digital surveillance, digital integrity, trust, privacy and confidentiality, civil rights, and governance. Whilst these measures were understandable during a pandemic, the public were concerned about receiving inadequate information, unclear governance frameworks, and lack of privacy protection, data integrity and autonomy when utilizing ID digital surveillance. The barriers to engagement could widen existing healthcare disparities or digital divides by underrepresenting vulnerable and at-risk populations, and expose patients' highly sensitive data such as their movements and contacts to outside sources, impinging significantly upon basic human and civil rights.

Conclusions

Our findings inform ethical considerations for service delivery models for medical practitioners and policymakers implicated in the use of digital surveillance for ID spread and a basis for the global governance structure.

Clinicaltrial

SUBMITTER: Zhao YI

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8530254 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Timely notification of infectious diseases is crucial for prompt response by public health services. Adequate notification systems facilitate timely notification. A systematic literature review was performed to assess outcomes of studies on notification timeliness and to determine which aspects of notification systems are associated with timely notification. METHODOLOGY:Articles reviewing timeliness of notifications published between 2000 and 2017 were searched in Pubmed and Scopus. Using a standardized notification chain, timeliness of reporting system for each article was defined as either sufficient (≥ 80% notifications in time), partly sufficient (≥ 50-80%), or insufficient (< 50%) according to the article's predefined timeframe, a standardized timeframe for all articles, and a disease specific timeframe. Electronic notification systems were compared with conventional methods (postal mail, fax, telephone, email) and mobile phone reporting. RESULTS:48 articles were identified. In almost one third of the studies with a predefined timeframe (39), timeliness of notification systems was either sufficient or insufficient (11/39, 28% and 12/39, 31% resp.). Applying the standardized timeframe (45 studies) revealed similar outcomes (13/45, 29%, sufficient notification timeframe, vs 15/45, 33%, insufficient). The disease specific timeframe was not met by any study. Systems involving reporting by laboratories most often complied sufficiently with predefined or standardized timeframes. Outcomes were not related to electronic, conventional notification systems or mobile phone reporting. Electronic systems were faster in comparative studies (10/13); this hardly resulted in sufficient timeliness, neither according to predefined nor to standardized timeframes. CONCLUSION:A minority of notification systems meets either predefined, standardized or disease specific timeframes. Systems including laboratory reporting are associated with timely notification. Electronic systems reduce reporting delay, but implementation needs considerable effort to comply with notification timeframes. During outbreak threats, patient, doctors and laboratory testing delays need to be reduced to achieve timely detection and notification. Public health authorities should incorporate procedures for this in their preparedness plans.

Project description:BackgroundTimeliness is a key performance measure of public health surveillance systems. Timeliness can vary by disease, intended use of the data, and public health system level. Studies were reviewed to describe methods used to evaluate timeliness and the reporting timeliness of National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System (NNDSS) data was evaluated to determine if this system could support timely notification and state response to multistate outbreaks.MethodsPublished papers that quantitatively measured timeliness of infectious disease surveillance systems operating in the U.S. were reviewed. Median reporting timeliness lags were computed for selected nationally notifiable infectious diseases based on a state-assigned week number and various date types. The percentage of cases reported within the estimated incubation periods for each disease was also computed.ResultsFew studies have published quantitative measures of reporting timeliness; these studies do not evaluate timeliness in a standard manner. When timeliness of NNDSS data was evaluated, the median national reporting delay, based on date of disease onset, ranged from 12 days for meningococcal disease to 40 days for pertussis. Diseases with the longer incubation periods tended to have a higher percentage of cases reported within its incubation period. For acute hepatitis A virus infection, which had the longest incubation period of the diseases studied, more than 60% of cases were reported within one incubation period for each date type reported. For cryptosporidiosis, Escherichia coli O157:H7 infection, meningococcal disease, salmonellosis, and shigellosis, less than 40% of cases were reported within one incubation period for each reported date type.ConclusionPublished evaluations of infectious disease surveillance reporting timeliness are few in number and are not comparable. A more standardized approach for evaluating and describing surveillance system timeliness should be considered; a recommended methodology is presented. Our analysis of NNDSS reporting timeliness indicated that among the conditions evaluated (except for acute hepatitis A infection), the long reporting lag and the variability across states limits the usefulness of NNDSS data and aberration detection analysis of those data for identification of and timely response to multistate outbreaks. Further evaluation of the factors that contribute to NNDSS reporting timeliness is warranted.

Project description:BackgroundThe areas of Research Ethics (RE) and Research Integrity (RI) are rapidly evolving. Cases of research misconduct, other transgressions related to RE and RI, and forms of ethically questionable behaviors have been frequently published. The objective of this scoping review was to collect RE and RI cases, analyze their main characteristics, and discuss how these cases are represented in the scientific literature.MethodsThe search included cases involving a violation of, or misbehavior, poor judgment, or detrimental research practice in relation to a normative framework. A search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, SCOPUS, JSTOR, Ovid, and Science Direct in March 2018, without language or date restriction. Data relating to the articles and the cases were extracted from case descriptions.ResultsA total of 14,719 records were identified, and 388 items were included in the qualitative synthesis. The papers contained 500 case descriptions. After applying the eligibility criteria, 238 cases were included in the analysis. In the case analysis, fabrication and falsification were the most frequently tagged violations (44.9%). The non-adherence to pertinent laws and regulations, such as lack of informed consent and REC approval, was the second most frequently tagged violation (15.7%), followed by patient safety issues (11.1%) and plagiarism (6.9%). 80.8% of cases were from the Medical and Health Sciences, 11.5% from the Natural Sciences, 4.3% from Social Sciences, 2.1% from Engineering and Technology, and 1.3% from Humanities. Paper retraction was the most prevalent sanction (45.4%), followed by exclusion from funding applications (35.5%).ConclusionsCase descriptions found in academic journals are dominated by discussions regarding prominent cases and are mainly published in the news section of journals. Our results show that there is an overrepresentation of biomedical research cases over other scientific fields compared to its proportion in scientific publications. The cases mostly involve fabrication, falsification, and patient safety issues. This finding could have a significant impact on the academic representation of misbehaviors. The predominance of fabrication and falsification cases might diverge the attention of the academic community from relevant but less visible violations, and from recently emerging forms of misbehaviors.

Project description:There is growing concern in Sub-Saharan Africa about the spread of the Ebola virus disease (EVD), formerly known as Ebola haemorrhagic fever, and the public health burden that it ensues. Since 1976, there have been 885,343 suspected and laboratory confirmed cases of EVD and the disease has claimed 2,512 cases and 932 fatality in West Africa. There are certain requirements that must be met when responding to EVD outbreaks and this process could incur certain challenges. For the purposes of this paper, five have been identified: (i) the deficiency in the development and implementation of surveillance response systems against Ebola and others infectious disease outbreaks in Africa; (ii) the lack of education and knowledge resulting in an EVD outbreak triggering panic, anxiety, psychosocial trauma, isolation and dignity impounding, stigmatisation, community ostracism and resistance to associated socio-ecological and public health consequences; (iii) limited financial resources, human technical capacity and weak community and national health system operational plans for prevention and control responses, practices and management; (iv) inadequate leadership and coordination; and (v) the lack of development of new strategies, tools and approaches, such as improved diagnostics and novel therapies including vaccines which can assist in preventing, controlling and containing Ebola outbreaks as well as the spread of the disease. Hence, there is an urgent need to develop and implement an active early warning alert and surveillance response system for outbreak response and control of emerging infectious diseases. Understanding the unending risks of transmission dynamics and resurgence is essential in implementing rapid effective response interventions tailored to specific local settings and contexts.Therefore, the following actions are recommended(i) national and regional inter-sectorial and trans-disciplinary surveillance response systems that include early warnings, as well as critical human resources development, must be quickly adopted by allied ministries and organisations in African countries in epidemic and pandemic responses; (ii) harnessing all stakeholders commitment and advocacy in sustained funding, collaboration, communication and networking including community participation to enhance a coordinated responses, as well as tracking and prompt case management to combat challenges; (iii) more research and development in new drug discovery and vaccines; and (iv) understanding the involvement of global health to promote the establishment of public health surveillance response systems with functions of early warning, as well as monitoring and evaluation in upholding research-action programmes and innovative interventions.