Children as an afterthought during COVID-19: defining a child-inclusive ethical framework for pandemic policymaking.

BACKGROUND: Following the SARS pandemic, jurisdictions around the world began developing ethical resource allocation frameworks for future pandemics-one such framework was developed by Thompson and colleagues. While this framework offers a solid backbone upon which decision-makers can rest assured that their work is driven by rigorous ethical processes and principles, it fails to take into account the nuanced experiences and interests of children and youth (i.e., young people) in a pandemic context. The current COVID-19 pandemic offers an opportunity to re-examine this framework from young people's perspectives, informed by advances in childhood ethics and children's rights. MAIN BODY: In this paper, we revisit the Thompson et al. framework and propose adaptations to the ethical processes and values outlined therein. This work is informed by expertise in clinical ethics and literature related to impacts of COVID-19 and other pandemics on the health and well-being of children around the world, though with particular attention to Canada. During the processes of drafting this work, stakeholders were consulted-aligned with the approach used by Thompson and colleagues-to validate the interpretations provided. We also propose a new principle, namely practicability, to indicate the complex balance between what is possible and what is convenient that is required in ethically sound decisions in the context of services affecting young people. We outline and discuss the strengths and limitations of our work and indicate next steps for scholars in the areas of childhood studies and child health. CONCLUSION: Efforts to ensure frameworks are truly child-inclusive should be the status-quo, so pandemic impacts and policy implications can be considered in advance of emergency preparedness contexts.

Pursuing impact in research: towards an ethical approach.

BACKGROUND: Research proactively and deliberately aims to bring about specific changes to how societies function and individual lives fare. However, in the ever-expanding field of ethical regulations and guidance for researchers, one ethical consideration seems to have passed under the radar: How should researchers act when pursuing actual, societal changes based on their academic work? MAIN TEXT: When researchers engage in the process of bringing about societal impact to tackle local or global challenges important concerns arise: cultural, social and political values and institutions can be put at risk, transformed or even hampered if researchers lack awareness of how their 'acting to impact' influences the social world. With today's strong focus on research impacts, addressing such ethical challenges has become urgent within in all fields of research involved in finding solutions to the challenges societies are facing. Due to the overall goal of doing something good that is often inherent in ethical approaches, boundaries to researchers' impact of something good is neither obvious, nor easy to detect. We suggest that it is time for the field of bioethics to explore normative boundaries for researchers' pursuit of impact and to consider, in detail, the ethical obligations that ought to shape this process, and we provide a four-step framework of fair conditions for such an approach. Our suggested approach within this field can be useful for other fields of research as well. CONCLUSION: With this paper, we draw attention to how the transition from pursuing impact within the Academy to trying to initiate and achieve impact beyond the Academy ought to be configured, and the ethical challenges inherent in this transition. We suggest a stepwise strategy to identify, discuss and constitute consensus-based boundaries to this academic activity. This strategy calls for efforts from a multi-disciplinary team of researchers, advisors from the humanities and social sciences, as well as discussants from funding institutions, ethical committees, politics and the society in general. Such efforts should be able to offer new and useful assistance to researchers, as well as research funding agencies, in choosing ethically acceptable, impact-pursuing projects.

Ethical and Methodological Considerations of Twitter Data for Public Health Research: Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Much research is being carried out using publicly available Twitter data in the field of public health, but the types of research questions that these data are being used to answer and the extent to which these projects require ethical oversight are not clear. OBJECTIVE: This review describes the current state of public health research using Twitter data in terms of methods and research questions, geographic focus, and ethical considerations including obtaining informed consent from Twitter handlers. METHODS: We implemented a systematic review, following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, of articles published between January 2006 and October 31, 2019, using Twitter data in secondary analyses for public health research, which were found using standardized search criteria on SocINDEX, PsycINFO, and PubMed. Studies were excluded when using Twitter for primary data collection, such as for study recruitment or as part of a dissemination intervention. RESULTS: We identified 367 articles that met eligibility criteria. Infectious disease (n=80, 22%) and substance use (n=66, 18%) were the most common topics for these studies, and sentiment mining (n=227, 62%), surveillance (n=224, 61%), and thematic exploration (n=217, 59%) were the most common methodologies employed. Approximately one-third of articles had a global or worldwide geographic focus; another one-third focused on the United States. The majority (n=222, 60%) of articles used a native Twitter application programming interface, and a significant amount of the remainder (n=102, 28%) used a third-party application programming interface. Only one-third (n=119, 32%) of studies sought ethical approval from an institutional review board, while 17% of them (n=62) included identifying information on Twitter users or tweets and 36% of them (n=131) attempted to anonymize identifiers. Most studies (n=272, 79%) included a discussion on the validity of the measures and reliability of coding (70% for interreliability of human coding and 70% for computer algorithm checks), but less attention was paid to the sampling frame, and what underlying population the sample represented. CONCLUSIONS: Twitter data may be useful in public health research, given its access to publicly available information. However, studies should exercise greater caution in considering the data sources, accession method, and external validity of the sampling frame. Further, an ethical framework is necessary to help guide future research in this area, especially when individual, identifiable Twitter users and tweets are shared and discussed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020148170; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=148170.

Community engagement in genomic research: Proposing a strategic model for effective participation of indigenous communities.

Community engagement (CE) contributes to successful research. There is, however, a lack of literature on the effectiveness of different models of CE and, specifically, on CE strategies for the conduct of genomic research in sub-Saharan Africa. There is also a need for models of CE that transcend the recruitment stage of engaging prospective individuals and communities and embed CE throughout the research process and after the research has concluded. The qualitative study reported here was designed to address these knowledge gaps and comprised of 36 key informant semi-structured interviews and fifteen focus groups with 50 participants. We interviewed selected stakeholders in genomic research in Nigeria: biomedical researchers, community rulers, opinion leaders, community health workers, and prospective research participants. We explored these stakeholders' views on their understanding of community engagement, their expectations, experiences, and their opinions on acceptable processes of community consultation in genomic research. The methodological design, adapted from grounded theory, used the constant comparative method of data analysis; while normative conclusions were made using the symbiotic empirical ethics approach. Data analysis revealed five main themes important for successfully engaging communities in genomic research: effective communication, diversity of community gatekeeping, trust, cultural integration of research, and conservation of the research setting. From these themes, we have developed a four-stage model of community engagement that covers all stages of the research process; namely, the Community Approach, Intermediate phase, Collaboration and Post-research Cordiality model (CICP). This model could be used to improve the integration of CE in genomic research among local communities.

Compliance with the ethical competence framework by head nurses.

BACKGROUND: Head nurses have duties in providing nursing care and ethical supervision to the nurses in the unit. Compliance with the ethical competence framework for head nurses is essential in fostering an ethical climate in the organization. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this research is to study the head nurses' compliance with the ethical competence framework by the Thailand Nursing and Midwifery Council (TNMC). METHODS: The study is a qualitative research, using in-depth interviews conducted among 20 head nurses practicing in a super tertiary hospital in Bangkok, Thailand. The sample was selected using a criterion sampling method. The head nurses' ethical experience relating to work practice was analyzed by thematic analysis. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS: The ethical approval of this study was obtained from the Committee for Research Ethics (Social Sciences), Mahidol University, and from the Institutional Review Board of the hospital in which the study was conducted. RESULTS: From the thematic analysis of the ethical experience practiced by the head nurses, 8 themes and 16 sub-themes were categorized across 5 ethical competencies based on the ethical competence framework by the TNMC. It was found that all the identified themes and sub-themes conformed to the ethical competence framework, and demonstrated the head nurses' compliance with the framework. DISCUSSION: Head nurses' ethical experience in practice conforms to the ethical competence framework by the TNMC. The framework that is based on the Code of conduct and the nursing culture that places the importance of the seniority system may facilitate the compliance with the ethical competence framework. CONCLUSION: Head nurses demonstrated compliance with the ethical competence framework by the TNMC. Nevertheless, improvements could be done to the framework by adding details such as more examples of ethical decision-making scenarios, personnel's rights, and social media usage guidelines.

Tracing app technology: an ethical review in the COVID-19 era and directions for post-COVID-19.

We conducted a systematic literature review on the ethical considerations of the use of contact tracing app technology, which was extensively implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic. The rapid and extensive use of this technology during the COVID-19 pandemic, while benefiting the public well-being by providing information about people's mobility and movements to control the spread of the virus, raised several ethical concerns for the post-COVID-19 era. To investigate these concerns for the post-pandemic situation and provide direction for future events, we analyzed the current ethical frameworks, research, and case studies about the ethical usage of tracing app technology. The results suggest there are seven essential ethical considerations-privacy, security, acceptability, government surveillance, transparency, justice, and voluntariness-in the ethical use of contact tracing technology. In this paper, we explain and discuss these considerations and how they are needed for the ethical usage of this technology. The findings also highlight the importance of developing integrated guidelines and frameworks for implementation of such technology in the post- COVID-19 world. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10676-022-09659-6.

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Infection Challenge Experiments in Nonhuman Primates: An Ethical Perspective.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has stimulated massive investment in biomedical research with the aims of understanding the disease and developing effective vaccine and therapeutic interventions. What role should animal research play in this scientific endeavor? Both the urgency to evaluate candidate interventions for human use and growing societal concern about ethical treatment of (nonhuman) animals put into question the justifiability of animal research as a precursor to clinical trials. Yet forgoing animal research in the rush to undertake human testing might expose human research participants to unacceptable risks. In this article, we apply a recently developed framework of principles for animal research ethics in exploring ethical questions raised by a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection challenge experiment involving rhesus macaques, which evaluated the protective efficacy of the mRNA-1273 vaccine that was recently approved for emergency use. Our aim is to illuminate the ethical issues while introducing, and illustrating the use of, the framework.

A Health Systems Ethical Framework for De-implementation in Health Care.

INTRODUCTION: Unnecessary health care not only drive up costs, but also contribute to avoidable patient harms, underscoring an ethical obligation to eliminate practices which are harmful, lack evidence, and prevent spending on more beneficial services. To date, de-implementation ethics discussions have been limited and focused on clinical ethics principles. An analysis of de-implementation ethics in the broader context of the health care system is lacking. METHODS: To better understand the ethical considerations of de-implementation, recognizing it as a health care systems issue, we applied Krubiner and Hyder's bioethical framework for health systems activity. We examine ethics principles relevant to de-implementation, which either call for or facilitate the reduction of low value surgery. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: From 11 health systems principles proposed by Krubiner and Hyder, we identified the 5 principles most pertinent to the topic of de-implementation: evidence and effectiveness, transparency and public engagement, efficiency, responsiveness, and collaboration. An analysis of de-implementation through the lens of these principles not only supports de-implementation but proves an obligation at the health system level to eliminate low value care. Recognizing the challenge of defining "value," the proposed framework may increase the legitimacy and objectivity of de-implementation. CONCLUSIONS: While there is no single ideal ethical framework from which to approach de-implementation, a health systems framework allows for consideration of the systems-level factors impacting de-implementation. Framing de-implementation as a health systems issue with systems-wide ethical implications empowers providers to think about new ways to approach potential roadblocks to reducing low-value care.

A major new alliance in Australian healthcare: the Australian consensus framework for ethical collaboration in the healthcare sector.

The 'Australian Consensus Framework for Ethical Collaboration in the Healthcare Sector' (ACF) is an Australian initiative aimed at countering dysfunction and growing mistrust in the health sector through the development of a cross-sectoral consensus framework. The development of this framework arose from Australia's involvement in the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperative (APEC) and has since become the largest of its kind internationally, with over 70 signatories representing professional bodies, industry organisations, hospital and health services associations, regulators and patient and advocacy groups. In this article, we describe and critique the framework and outline its implementation.

Developing an Islamic Research Ethics Framework.

In surveying the medical literature on Islamic principles of research ethics, it is apparent that attempts to identify ethical principles are replete with issues of standards and gaps in knowledge of the uses of scriptural sources. Despite this, attempts at creating an Islamic ethical framework for research ethics may improve current practices in research in Muslim-majority countries and contribute to the growing canon of secular bioethics. This paper aims to identify principles and considerations within Islam that (1) overlap with current corpora on research ethics, and (2) further informs the current research ethics discourse.

Pandemic influenza preparedness in the WHO African region: are we ready yet?

BACKGROUND: Prior to the 2009 pandemic H1N1, and the unprecedented outbreak of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) caused by the H5N1 virus, the World Health Organization (WHO) called upon its Member States to develop preparedness plans in response to a new pandemic in humans. The WHO Member States responded to this call by developing national pandemic plans in accordance with the International Health Regulations (IHR) to strengthen the capabilities of Member States to respond to different pandemic scenarios. In this study, we aim to evaluate the quality of the preparedness plans in the WHO African region since their inception in 2005. METHODS: A standard checklist with 61 binary indicators ("yes" or "no") was used to assess the quality of the preparedness plans. The checklist was categorised across seven thematic areas of preparedness: preparation (16 indicators); coordination and partnership (5 indicators); risk communication (8 indicators); surveillance and monitoring (7 indicators); prevention and containment (10 indicators); case investigation and treatment (10 indicators) and ethical consideration (5 indicators). Four assessors independently scored the plans against the checklist. RESULTS: Of the 47 countries in the WHO African region, a total of 35 national pandemic plans were evaluated. The composite score for the completeness of the pandemic plans across the 35 countries was 36%. Country-specific scores on each of the thematic indicators for pandemic plan completeness varied, ranging from 5% in Côte d'Ivoire to 79% in South Africa. On average, preparation and risk communication scored 48%, respectively, while coordination and partnership scored the highest with an aggregate score of 49%. Surveillance and monitoring scored 34%, while prevention and containment scored 35%. Case investigation and treatment scored 25%, and ethical consideration scored the lowest of 14% across 35 countries. Overall, our assessment shows that pandemic preparedness plans across the WHO African region are inadequate. CONCLUSIONS: Moving forward, these plans must address the gaps identified in this study and demonstrate clarity in their goals that are achievable through drills, simulations and tabletop exercises.

Limits to the scope of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT): an analysis of the international ethical framework for prenatal screening and an interview study with Dutch professionals.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for foetal aneuploidies is currently changing the field of prenatal screening in many countries. As it is non-invasive, safe and accurate, this technique allows for a broad implementation of first-trimester prenatal screening, which raises ethical issues, related, for instance, to informed choice and adverse societal consequences. This article offers an account of a leading international ethical framework for prenatal screening, examines how this framework is used by professionals working in the field of NIPT, and presents ethical guidance for the expansion of the scope of prenatal screening in practice. METHODS: A comparative analysis of authoritative documents is combined with 15 semi-structured interviews with professionals in the field of prenatal screening in the Netherlands. Data were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: The current ethical framework consists of four pillars: the aim of screening, the proportionality of the test, justice, and societal aspects. Respondents recognised and supported this framework in practice, but expressed some concerns. Professionals felt that pregnant women do not always make informed choices, while this is seen as central to reproductive autonomy (the aim of screening), and that pre-test counselling practices stand in need of improvement. Respondents believed that the benefits of NIPT, and of an expansion of its scope, outweigh the harms (proportionality), which are thought to be acceptable. They felt that the out-of-pocket financial contribution currently required by pregnant women constitutes a barrier to access to NIPT, which disproportionally affects those of a lower socioeconomic status (justice). Finally, professionals recognised but did not share concerns about a rising pressure to test or discrimination of disabled persons (societal aspects). CONCLUSIONS: Four types of limits to the scope of NIPT are proposed: NIPT should generate only test outcomes that are relevant to reproductive decision-making, informed choice should be (made) possible through adequate pre-test counselling, the rights of future children should be respected, and equal access should be guaranteed. Although the focus of the interview study is on the Dutch healthcare setting, insights and conclusions can be applied internationally and to other healthcare systems.

Ethical framework for the detection, management and communication of incidental findings in imaging studies, building on an interview study of researchers' practices and perspectives.

BACKGROUND: As thousands of healthy research participants are being included in small and large imaging studies, it is essential that dilemmas raised by the detection of incidental findings are adequately handled. Current ethical guidance indicates that pathways for dealing with incidental findings should be in place, but does not specify what such pathways should look like. Building on an interview study of researchers' practices and perspectives, we identified key considerations for the set-up of pathways for the detection, management and communication of incidental findings in imaging research. METHODS: We conducted an interview study with a purposive sample of researchers (n = 20) at research facilities across the Netherlands. Based on a qualitative analysis of these interviews and on existing guidelines found in the literature, we developed a prototype ethical framework, which was critically assessed and fine-tuned during a two-day international expert meeting with bioethicists and representatives from large population-based imaging studies from the United Kingdom, Germany, Sweden and Belgium (n = 14). RESULTS: Practices and policies for the handling of incidental findings vary strongly across the Netherlands, ranging from no review of research scans and limited feedback to research participants, to routine review of scans and the arrangement of clinical follow-up. Respondents felt that researchers do not have a duty to actively look for incidental findings, but they do have a duty to act on findings, when detected. The principle of reciprocity featured prominently in our interviews and expert meeting. CONCLUSION: We present an ethical framework that may guide researchers and research ethics committees in the design and/or evaluation of appropriate pathways for the handling of incidental findings in imaging studies. The framework consists of seven steps: anticipation of findings, information provision and informed consent, scan acquisition, review of scans, consultation on detected abnormalities, communication of the finding, and further clinical management and follow-up of the research participant. Each of these steps represents a key decision to be made by researchers, which should be justified not only with reference to costs and/or logistical considerations, but also with reference to researchers' moral obligations and the principle of reciprocity.

Collaborative partnership and the social value of clinical research: a qualitative secondary analysis.

BACKGROUND: Protecting human subjects from being exploited is one of the main ethical challenges for clinical research. However, there is also a responsibility to protect and respect the communities who are hosting the research. Recently, attention has focused on the most efficient way of carrying out clinical research, so that it benefits society by providing valuable research while simultaneously protecting and respecting the human subjects and the communities where the research is conducted. Collaboration between partners plays an important role and that is why we carried out a study to describe how collaborative partnership and social value are emerging in clinical research. METHODS: A supra-analysis design for qualitative descriptive secondary analysis was employed to consider a novel research question that pertained to nurse leaders' perceptions of ethical recruitment in clinical research and the ethics-related aspects of clinical research from the perspective of administrative staff. The data consisted of two separate pre-existing datasets, comprising 451 pages from 41 interviews, and we considered the research question by using deductive-inductive content analysis with NVivo software. A deductive analysis matrix was generated on the basis of two requirements, namely collaborative partnership and social value, as presented in An Ethical Framework for Biomedical Research by Emanuel et al. RESULTS: The findings showed that collaborative partnership was a cornerstone for ethical clinical research and ways to foster inter-partner collaboration were indicated, such as supporting mutual respect and equality, shared goals and clearly defined roles and responsibilities. In addition, the social value of clinical research was an important precondition for ethical clinical research and its realisation required the research partners to demonstrate collaboration and shared responsibility during the research process. However, concerns emerged that the multidimensional meaning of clinical research for society was not fully recognised. Achieving greater social value for clinical research required greater transparency, setting research priorities, shared responsibility for the dissemination and use of the findings and stronger community awareness of the ethics-related aspects of clinical research. CONCLUSIONS: Collaborative partnership and social values are essential for protecting the human subjects and communities involved in clinical research.

Ethical implications of home telecare for older people: a framework derived from a multisited participative study.

CONTEXT: Telecare and telehealth developments have recently attracted much attention in research and service development contexts, where their evaluation has predominantly concerned effectiveness and efficiency. Their social and ethical implications, in contrast, have received little scrutiny. OBJECTIVE: To develop an ethical framework for telecare systems based on analysis of observations of telecare-in-use and citizens' panel deliberations. DESIGN: Ethnographic study (observation, work shadowing), interviews, older citizens' panels and a participative conference. SETTING: Participants' homes, workplaces and familiar community venues in England, Spain, the Netherlands and Norway 2008-2011. RESULTS: Older respondents expressed concerns that telecare might be used to replace face-to-face/hands-on care to cut costs. Citizens' panels strongly advocated ethical and social questions being considered in tandem with technical and policy developments. Older people are too often excluded from telecare system design, and installation is often wrongly seen as a one-off event. Some systems enhance self-care by increasing self-awareness, while others shift agency away from the older person, introducing new forms of dependency. CONCLUSIONS: Telecare has care limitations; it is not a solution, but a shift in networks of relations and responsibilities. Telecare cannot be meaningfully evaluated as an entity, but rather in the situated relations people and technologies create together. Characteristics of ethical telecare include on-going user/carer engagement in decision making about systems: in-home system evolution with feedback opportunities built into implementation. System design should be horizontal, 'two-way'/interactive rather than vertical or 'one-way'. An ethical framework for telecare has been developed from these conclusions (Table 1).

Patient experience in the emergency department: inconsistencies in the ethic and duty of care.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To understand how people who present on multiple occasions to the emergency department experience their health professionals' moral comportment (ethic of care and duty of care); and to understand the consequences of this for 'people who present on multiple occasions' ongoing choices in care. BACKGROUND: People (n = 34) with chronic illness who had multiple presentations were interviewed about the role that emergency departments played within their lives and health-illness journey. Unprompted, all participants shared views about the appropriateness or inappropriateness of the care they received from the health professionals in the emergency departments they had attended. These responses raised the imperative for specific analysis of the data regarding the need for and experience of an ethic of care. DESIGN: Qualitative description of interview data (stage 3 of a multimethod study). METHODS: The methods included further analysis of existing interviews, exploration of relevant literature, use of Tronto's ethic of care as a theoretical framework for analysis, thematic analysis of people who present on multiple occasions' texts and explication of health professionals' moral positions in relation to present on multiple occasions' experiences. RESULTS: Four moral comportment positions attributed by the people who present on multiple occasions to the health professionals in emergency department were identified: 'sustained and enmeshed ethic and duty of care', 'consistent duty of care', 'interrupted or mixed duty and ethic of care', and 'care in breach of both the ethic and duty of care'. CONCLUSIONS: People who present on multiple occasions are an important group of consumers who attend the emergency department. Tronto's phases/moral elements in an ethic of care are useful as a framework for coding qualitative texts. Investigation into the bases, outcomes and contextual circumstances that stimulate the different modes of moral comportment is needed. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Findings carry implications for emergency department care of people who present on multiple occasions and for emergency department health professionals to increase awareness of their moral comportment in care.

Ethical Concerns About ChatGPT in Healthcare: A Useful Tool or the Tombstone of Original and Reflective Thinking?

Artificial intelligence (AI), the uprising technology of computer science aiming to create digital systems with human behavior and intelligence, seems to have invaded almost every field of modern life. Launched in November 2022, ChatGPT (Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer) is a textual AI application capable of creating human-like responses characterized by original language and high coherence. Although AI-based language models have demonstrated impressive capabilities in healthcare, ChatGPT has received controversial annotations from the scientific and academic communities. This chatbot already appears to have a massive impact as an educational tool for healthcare professionals and transformative potential for clinical practice and could lead to dramatic changes in scientific research. Nevertheless, rational concerns were raised regarding whether the pre-trained, AI-generated text would be a menace not only for original thinking and new scientific ideas but also for academic and research integrity, as it gets more and more difficult to distinguish its AI origin due to the coherence and fluency of the produced text. This short review aims to summarize the potential applications and the consequential implications of ChatGPT in the three critical pillars of medicine: education, research, and clinical practice. In addition, this paper discusses whether the current use of this chatbot is in compliance with the ethical principles for the safe use of AI in healthcare, as determined by the World Health Organization. Finally, this review highlights the need for an updated ethical framework and the increased vigilance of healthcare stakeholders to harvest the potential benefits and limit the imminent dangers of this new innovative technology.

Ethical framework for artificial intelligence in healthcare research: A path to integrity.

The integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) into healthcare research promises unprecedented advancements in medical diagnostics, treatment personalization, and patient care management. However, these innovations also bring forth significant ethical challenges that must be addressed to maintain public trust, ensure patient safety, and uphold data integrity. This article sets out to introduce a detailed framework designed to steer governance and offer a systematic method for assuring that AI applications in healthcare research are developed and executed with integrity and adherence to medical research ethics.

An Ethical Framework for Allergy and Immunology.

Ethical dilemmas routinely occur in the clinical practice of allergy and immunology. These ethical questions stem from the range of conditions and the different populations cared for by Allergists/Immunologists. Hence, medical ethics is not an esoteric concept, but a practical skill physicians exercise regularly. Moreover, an ethics-centered approach may improve patient safety and outcomes. This article describes key principles of bioethics and illustrates an ethical framework that physicians can use in their conversations with patients. Utilization of this ethical framework is demonstrated through applying it to 4 unique clinical scenarios encountered by Allergists/Immunologists from different practice settings. The ethical framework for allergy and immunology is a technique to navigate ethically complex decisions that arise in routine clinical practice.

Testing and Refining the Ethical Framework for the Use of Horses in Sport.

In 2021, in response to an acknowledged need for universal, consistent ethics to guide decision making in the horse sport sector, Campbell published a theoretical ethical framework for the use of horses in competitive sport. The research reported here tested the applied usefulness of that theoretical ethical framework through stakeholder engagement in a three-round modified Delphi study and refined it to develop a practical decision-making tool which can be applied consistently across multiple equestrian disciplines. Stakeholders from a broad range of equestrian competitive disciplines participated in the research. Participants were required to apply the ethical framework to a pre-determined ethical dilemma, individually (Rounds 1 and 2) and within a group (Round 3), and at the end of each round to complete a questionnaire designed to gauge opinion and user experience. At the completion of each round of testing, the theoretical framework was refined based on stakeholder feedback. Results showed that participants perceived useability and application of the framework to generally increase with each round. Qualitative content analysis identified key concepts, including cognition (e.g., broadens/deepens thinking) and application (e.g., considers multiple angles from a variety of information sources, needs to be a short/simple process). Results suggested that the refined framework is beneficial for group decision making across a wide variety of ethical issues and equestrian competitive disciplines. The framework thus has the potential to improve equine welfare through facilitating consistent ethical decision making in which the interests of the horse are prioritized.