Is there a duty to participate in digital epidemiology?

Abstract This paper poses the question of whether people have a duty to participate in digital epidemiology. While an implied duty to participate has been argued for in relation to biomedical research in general, digital epidemiology involves processing of non-medical, granular and proprietary data...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Brent Mittelstadt, Justus Benzler, Lukas Engelmann, Barbara Prainsack, Effy Vayena
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2018-05-01
Series:Life Sciences, Society and Policy
Online Access:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40504-018-0074-1
id doaj-3a76e2c237ee42c3b906fd287f05531b
record_format Article
spelling doaj-3a76e2c237ee42c3b906fd287f05531b2020-11-24T21:08:45ZengBMCLife Sciences, Society and Policy2195-78192018-05-0114112410.1186/s40504-018-0074-1Is there a duty to participate in digital epidemiology?Brent Mittelstadt0Justus Benzler1Lukas Engelmann2Barbara Prainsack3Effy Vayena4Oxford Internet Institute, University of OxfordRobert Koch InstituteUniversity of EdinburghUniversity of ViennaUniversitat ZurichAbstract This paper poses the question of whether people have a duty to participate in digital epidemiology. While an implied duty to participate has been argued for in relation to biomedical research in general, digital epidemiology involves processing of non-medical, granular and proprietary data types that pose different risks to participants. We first describe traditional justifications for epidemiology that imply a duty to participate for the general public, which take account of the immediacy and plausibility of threats, and the identifiability of data. We then consider how these justifications translate to digital epidemiology, understood as an evolution of traditional epidemiology that includes personal and proprietary digital data alongside formal medical datasets. We consider the risks imposed by re-purposing such data for digital epidemiology and propose eight justificatory conditions that should be met in justifying a duty to participate for specific digital epidemiological studies. The conditions are then applied to three hypothetical cases involving usage of social media data for epidemiological purposes. We conclude with a list of questions to be considered in public negotiations of digital epidemiology, including the application of a duty to participate to third-party data controllers, and the important distinction between moral and legal obligations to participate in research.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40504-018-0074-1
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Brent Mittelstadt
Justus Benzler
Lukas Engelmann
Barbara Prainsack
Effy Vayena
spellingShingle Brent Mittelstadt
Justus Benzler
Lukas Engelmann
Barbara Prainsack
Effy Vayena
Is there a duty to participate in digital epidemiology?
Life Sciences, Society and Policy
author_facet Brent Mittelstadt
Justus Benzler
Lukas Engelmann
Barbara Prainsack
Effy Vayena
author_sort Brent Mittelstadt
title Is there a duty to participate in digital epidemiology?
title_short Is there a duty to participate in digital epidemiology?
title_full Is there a duty to participate in digital epidemiology?
title_fullStr Is there a duty to participate in digital epidemiology?
title_full_unstemmed Is there a duty to participate in digital epidemiology?
title_sort is there a duty to participate in digital epidemiology?
publisher BMC
series Life Sciences, Society and Policy
issn 2195-7819
publishDate 2018-05-01
description Abstract This paper poses the question of whether people have a duty to participate in digital epidemiology. While an implied duty to participate has been argued for in relation to biomedical research in general, digital epidemiology involves processing of non-medical, granular and proprietary data types that pose different risks to participants. We first describe traditional justifications for epidemiology that imply a duty to participate for the general public, which take account of the immediacy and plausibility of threats, and the identifiability of data. We then consider how these justifications translate to digital epidemiology, understood as an evolution of traditional epidemiology that includes personal and proprietary digital data alongside formal medical datasets. We consider the risks imposed by re-purposing such data for digital epidemiology and propose eight justificatory conditions that should be met in justifying a duty to participate for specific digital epidemiological studies. The conditions are then applied to three hypothetical cases involving usage of social media data for epidemiological purposes. We conclude with a list of questions to be considered in public negotiations of digital epidemiology, including the application of a duty to participate to third-party data controllers, and the important distinction between moral and legal obligations to participate in research.
url http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40504-018-0074-1
work_keys_str_mv AT brentmittelstadt isthereadutytoparticipateindigitalepidemiology
AT justusbenzler isthereadutytoparticipateindigitalepidemiology
AT lukasengelmann isthereadutytoparticipateindigitalepidemiology
AT barbaraprainsack isthereadutytoparticipateindigitalepidemiology
AT effyvayena isthereadutytoparticipateindigitalepidemiology
_version_ 1716759516194799616