Potential corporate uses of polygenic indexes: Starting a conversation about the associated ethics and policy issues.

Some commercial firms currently sell polygenic indexes (PGIs) to individual consumers, despite their relatively low predictive power. It might be tempting to assume that because the predictive power of many PGIs is so modest, other sorts of firms-such as those selling insurance and financial services-will not be interested in using PGIs for their own purposes. We argue to the contrary. We build this argument in two ways. First, we offer a very simple model, rooted in economic theory, of a profit-maximizing firm that can gain information about a single consumer's genome. We use the model to show that, depending on the specific economic environment, a firm would be willing to pay for statistically noisy PGIs, even if they allow for only a small reduction in uncertainty. Second, we describe two plausible scenarios in which these different kinds of firms could conceivably use PGIs to maximize profits. Finally, we briefly discuss some of the associated ethics and policy issues. They deserve more attention, which is unlikely to be given until it is first recognized that firms whose services affect a large swath of the public will indeed have incentives to use PGIs.

Predictors of student mask mandate policies in United States school districts during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Introduction: Although factors such as urbanicity, population demographics, and political affiliation have been linked with COVID-19 masking behavior and policy in community settings, little work has investigated factors associated with school mask policies. We sought to characterize United States state and school district student COVID-19 masking policies during the 2021-22 school year and determine predictors of these mandates at four time points, including before and after federal guidance relaxed school mask recommendations in February 2022. Methods: Student mask policies for US states and the District of Columbia, as well as a sample of 56 districts were categorized as prohibited, recommended, or required in September 2021, November 2021, January 2022, and March 2022 based on the Johns Hopkins eSchool+ Initiative School Reopening Tracker. Changes in policies over time were characterized. Generalized estimating equations and logistic regression were used to evaluate whether political affiliation of governor, urbanicity, economic disadvantage, and race/ethnic composition of district students, and county-level COVID-19 incidence predicted the presence of a district mask mandate at any time point and at all four time points. Results: State and district policies changed over time. Districts that implemented student mandates at any point were more likely to be in states with Democratic governors (AOR: 5.52; 95% CI: 2.23, 13.64) or in non-rural areas (AOR: 8.20; 95% CI: 2.63, 25.51). Districts that retained mask mandates at all four time points were more likely to have Democratic governors (AOR: 5.39; 95% CI: 2.69, 10.82) and serve a smaller proportion of economically disadvantaged students (AOR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.95, 0.99). Districts serving a larger proportion of students from minoritized racial/ethnic groups were more likely to have mask mandates at any or all timepoints. Notably, county-level COVID-19 prevalence was not related to the presence of a mask mandate at any or all time points. By March 2022, no factors were significantly associated with district mask policy. Discussion: Political, geographic, and demographic characteristics predicted the likelihood of student mask mandates in the 2021-22 school year. Public health promotion messages and policy must account for variation in these factors, potentially through centralized and consistent messaging and unbiased, trustworthy communication.

Assessing the Governance of Digital Contact Tracing in Response to COVID-19: Results of a Multi-National Study.

This paper describes the results of a multi-country survey of governance approaches for the use of digital contact tracing (DCT) in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. We argue that the countries in our survey represent two distinct models of DCT governance, both of which are flawed. The "data protection model" emphasizes privacy protections at the expense of public health benefit, while the "emergency response model" sacrifices transparency and accountability, prompting concerns about excessive governance surveillance. The ethical and effective use of DCT in the future requires a new governance approach that is better suited to this novel use of mobile phone data to promote public health."

Biologics for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: Economics and ethics.

Biologics have recently been approved for use in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps patients. While effective in controlling disease on subjective and objective short-term outcome measures, limited data suggest that biologics have the potential to be used long term. The current wholesale acquisition costs for biologics are quite high. Widespread, prolonged use of these medications may create a large burden to our healthcare system. Cost-effectiveness analyses, particularly for specific patient cohorts, are needed to determine appropriate use of these medications. The ethics of patient preference of various treatment options, counseling regarding side effect profiles, and healthcare economics also need to be addressed.

Influence of Community and Culture in the Ethical Allocation of Scarce Medical Resources in a Pandemic Situation: Deliberative Democracy Study.

BACKGROUND: Stark gaps exist between projected health needs in a pandemic situation and the current capacity of health care and medical countermeasure systems. Existing pandemic ethics discussions have advocated to engage the public in scarcity dilemmas and attend the local contexts and cultural perspectives that shape responses to a global health threat. This public engagement study thus considers the role of community and culture in the ethical apportionment of scarce health resources, specifically ventilators, during an influenza pandemic. It builds upon a previous exploration of the values and preferences of Maryland residents regarding how a finite supply of mechanical ventilators ought to be allocated during a severe global outbreak of influenza. An important finding of this earlier research was that local history and place within the state engendered different ways of thinking about scarcity. OBJECTIVE: Given the intrastate variation in the themes expressed by Maryland participants, the project team sought to examine interstate differences by implementing the same protocol elsewhere to answer the following questions. Does variation in ethical frames of reference exist within different regions of the United States? What practical implications does evidence of sameness and difference possess for pandemic planners and policymakers at local and national levels? METHODS: Research using the same deliberative democracy process from the Maryland study was conducted in Central Texas in March 2018 among 30 diverse participants, half of whom identified as Hispanic or Latino. Deliberative democracy provides a moderated process through which community members can learn facts about a public policy matter from experts and explore their own and others' views. RESULTS: Participants proposed that by evenly distributing supplies of ventilators and applying clear eligibility criteria consistently, health authorities could enable fair allocation of scarce lifesaving equipment. The strong identification, attachment, and obligation of persons toward their nuclear and extended families emerged as a distinctive regional and ethnic core value that has practical implications for the substance, administration, and communication of allocation frameworks. CONCLUSIONS: Maryland and Central Texas residents expressed a common, overriding concern about the fairness of allocation decisions. Central Texas deliberants, however, more readily expounded upon family as a central consideration. In Central Texas, family is a principal, culturally inflected lens through which life and death matters are often viewed. Conveners of other pandemic-related public engagement exercises in the United States have advocated the benefits of transparency and inclusivity in developing an ethical allocation framework; this study demonstrates cultural competence as a further advantage.

Science and Social Media.

He Jiankui et al. conducted an experiment that resulted in the birth of the first human babies with germline gene editing. Initial and predominant communications of their work occurred via social media and outside of the norms for reviewing, approving, and engaging around work in science. This case provides an opportunity to reflect on the evolving and increasing presence of social media in science, its strengths, weaknesses, and the potential to develop applications that improve how we review, approve, and engage around the work of science. Social media use in science presents significant challenges. The potential benefits of addressing these challenges and developing new social media tools include greater transparency, access, and engagement-and could nurture the public's trust. Stem Cells Translational Medicine 2019;8:1226&1229.

Too Many Patients A Framework to Guide Statewide Allocation of Scarce Mechanical Ventilation During Disasters.

The threat of a catastrophic public health emergency causing life-threatening illness or injury on a massive scale has prompted extensive federal, state, and local preparedness efforts. Modeling studies suggest that an influenza pandemic similar to that of 1918 would require ICU and mechanical ventilation capacity that is significantly greater than what is available. Several groups have published recommendations for allocating life-support measures during a public health emergency. Because there are multiple ethically permissible approaches to allocating scarce life-sustaining resources and because the public will bear the consequences of these decisions, knowledge of public perspectives and moral points of reference on these issues is critical. Here we describe a critical care disaster resource allocation framework developed following a statewide community engagement process in Maryland. It is intended to assist hospitals and public health agencies in their independent and coordinated response to an officially declared catastrophic health emergency in which demand for mechanical ventilators exceeds the capabilities of all surge response efforts and in which there has been an executive order to implement scarce resource allocation procedures. The framework, built on a basic scoring system with modifications for specific considerations, also creates an opportunity for the legal community to review existing laws and liability protections in light of a specific disaster response process.

Scarce Resource Allocation During Disasters: A Mixed-Method Community Engagement Study.

BACKGROUND: During a catastrophe, health-care providers may face difficult questions regarding who will receive limited life-saving resources. The ethical principles that should guide decision-making have been considered by expert panels but have not been well explored with the public or front-line clinicians. The objective of this study was to characterize the public's values regarding how scarce mechanical ventilators should be allocated during an influenza pandemic, with the ultimate goal of informing a statewide scare resource allocation framework. METHODS: Adopting deliberative democracy practices, we conducted 15 half-day community engagement forums with the general public and health-related professionals. Small group discussions of six potential guiding ethical principles were led by trained facilitators. The forums consisted exclusively of either members of the general public or health-related or disaster response professionals and were convened in a variety of meeting places across the state of Maryland. Primary data sources were predeliberation and postdeliberation surveys and the notes from small group deliberations compiled by trained note takers. RESULTS: Three hundred twenty-four individuals participated in 15 forums. Participants indicated a preference for prioritizing short-term and long-term survival, but they indicated that these should not be the only factors driving decision-making during a crisis. Qualitative analysis identified 10 major themes that emerged. Many, but not all, themes were consistent with previously issued recommendations. The most important difference related to withholding vs withdrawing ventilator support. CONCLUSIONS: The values expressed by the public and front-line clinicians sometimes diverge from expert guidance in important ways. Awareness of these differences should inform policy making.

The community speaks: understanding ethical values in allocation of scarce lifesaving resources during disasters.

INTRODUCTION: Pandemic influenza or other crises causing mass respiratory failure could easily overwhelm current North American critical care capacity. This threat has generated large-scale federal, state, and local efforts to prepare for a public health disaster. Few, however, have systematically engaged the public regarding which values are most important in guiding decisions about how to allocate scarce healthcare resources during such crises. METHODS: The aims of this pilot study were (1) to test whether deliberative democratic methods could be used to promote engaged discussion about complex, ethically challenging healthcare-related policy issues and (2) to develop specific deliberative democratic procedures that could ultimately be used in a statewide process to inform a Maryland framework for allocating scarce healthcare resources during disasters. Using collaboratively developed focus group materials and multiple metrics for assessing outcomes, we held 5-hour pilot community meetings with a combined total of 68 community members in two locations in Maryland. The key outcomes used to assess the project were (1) the comprehensibility of the background materials and ethical principles, (2) the salience of the ethical principles, (3) the perceived usefulness of the discussions, (4) the degree to which participants' opinions evolved as a result of the discussions, and (5) the quality of participant engagement. RESULTS: Most participants were thoughtful, reflective, and invested in this pilot policy-informing process. Throughout the pilot process, changes were made to background materials, the verbal introduction, and pre- and post-surveys. Importantly, by holding pilot meetings in two distinct communities (an affluent suburb and inner city neighborhood), we discerned that participants' ethical reflections were framed in large part by their place-based life experiences. CONCLUSION: This pilot process, coupled with extensive feedback from participants, yielded a refined methodology suitable for wider-scale use and underscored the need for involvement of diverse communities in a statewide engagement process on this critical policy issue.

Bioethical considerations in developing a biorepository for the Pneumonia Etiology Research for Child Health project.

The Pneumonia Etiology Research for Child Health (PERCH) project has the potential to provide a highly valuable resource of biospecimens that may be used to inform future studies on the causes of pneumonia. Designing a biorepository for this complex project was done in collaboration with a wide range of experts including bioethicists. In this paper, we describe the most significant ethical issues encountered related to the biorepository, focusing on its structure and informed consent. We also outline the proposed approach to the PERCH biorepository, which was designed to be sensitive to the ethical, practical, and cultural challenges inherent to the study. Through this process, we concluded that biorepository governance plans and strategies for managing informed consent should be implemented in a way to allow for careful study in order to better understand the attitudes of and impact on the stakeholders involved in the study.

Promoting justice in stem cell intellectual property.

According to the World Trade Organization, intellectual property rights are "rights given to persons over the creations of their minds. They usually give the creator an exclusive right over the use of his/her creation for a certain period of time." The rationale behind intellectual property rights is to offer a quid pro quo, between creators and the public, intended to spur innovation. Inventors gain exclusivity (and an opportunity for profits) in exchange for publicly disclosing details about their creations. The public gains free access to information - information that can then be used to support further innovation. Innovation is seen as an inherent good in this context, as it can lead to the development of things people need (e.g., treatments for disease, green energy technologies or a better mousetrap). Exclusive rights to intellectual property are managed via patents and licenses, with patenting being primarily regulated at the national level. Intellectual property rights are the dominant mechanism used in innovation policy, particularly in science. However, myriad modifications and alternatives to intellectual property rights have been proposed and utilized, including patent pooling, intellectual property exchanges and clearing houses, innovation prizes and open-source licenses. The challenges related to competing models of innovation policy present in a fairly consistent manner across most fields of science. However, this paper will focus exclusively on intellectual property rights and models of innovation policy in the context of stem cell science. It is not that the issues themselves are unique in this context, but rather that there are a series of factors that make a discussion of intellectual property rights and models of innovation policy particularly important in the context of stem cell science.

Medicine on the fringe: stem cell-based interventions in advance of evidence.

Stem cell-based interventions (SCBIs) offer great promise; however, there is currently little internationally accepted, scientific evidence supporting the clinical use of SCBIs. The consensus within the scientific community is that a number of hurdles still need to be cleared. Despite this, SCBIs are currently being offered to patients. This article provides a content analysis of materials obtained from SCBI providers. We find content that strains credulity and almost no evidence of SCBIs being delivered in the context of clinical trials. We conclude that until scientific evidence is available, as a general rule, providers should only offer SCBIs in the context of controlled clinical trials. Clients should be aware that the risks and benefits of SCBIs are unknown, that their participation is unlikely to advance scientific knowledge, and they are likely to become ineligible to participate in future clinical trials of SCBIs. We recommend steps to promote patient education and enhance global oversight.

The role of animal models in evaluating reasonable safety and efficacy for human trials of cell-based interventions for neurologic conditions.

Progress in regenerative medicine seems likely to produce new treatments for neurologic conditions that use human cells as therapeutic agents; at least one trial for such an intervention is already under way. The development of cell-based interventions for neurologic conditions (CBI-NCs) will likely include preclinical studies using animals as models for humans with conditions of interest. This paper explores predictive validity challenges and the proper role for animal models in developing CBI-NCs. In spite of limitations, animal models are and will remain an essential tool for gathering data in advance of first-in-human clinical trials. The goal of this paper is to provide a realistic lens for viewing the role of animal models in the context of CBI-NCs and to provide recommendations for moving forward through this challenging terrain.

Psychiatric and neuropsychiatric adverse events associated with deep brain stimulation: A meta-analysis of ten years' experience.

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) has been approved by the FDA for use in the treatment of Parkinson's disease, essential tremor, and dystonia. Case reports and case series have reported significant psychiatric side effects in some individuals. The goal of this meta-analysis is to characterize the risks and benefits of DBS and to assess its possible use within the psychiatric setting. A search was conducted on PubMed, EBSCO, and PsycInfo in January 2006 that covered the time period 1 Jan 1996-30 Dec 2005. All identified articles were reviewed and those describing adverse events were further examined with a structured instrument. The initial searches yielded 2667 citations; 808 articles met inclusion criteria for the meta-analysis; 98.2% of studies that specifically assessed motor function reported some level of improvement. Most reported side effects were device or procedure related (e.g., infection and lead fracture). The prevalence of depression was 2-4%, mania 0.9-1.7%, emotional changes 0.1-0.2%, and the prevalence of suicidal ideation/suicide attempt was 0.3-0.7%. The completed suicide rate was 0.16-0.32%. In conclusion, DBS is an effective treatment for Parkinson's disease, dystonia, and essential tremor, and case reports suggest that major depression and OCD may also respond to DBS. Reported rates of depression, cognitive impairment, mania, and behavior change are low, but there is a high rate of suicide in patients treated with DBS, particularly with thalamic and GPi stimulation. Because of the high suicide rate, patients should be prescreened for suicide risk prior to DBS surgery. Additionally, patients should be monitored closely for suicidal behavior post-operatively.