Tweet
BMC Med Ethics. 2017 May 5;18(1):33. doi: 10.1186/s12910-017-0192-y.
Self-tests for influenza: an empirical ethics investigation.
Rumbold B1, Wenham C2, Wilson J3.
Author information
Abstract
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.
KEYWORDS:
Diagnostics; Empirical ethics; Ethics; Influenza; Point-of-care tests; Self-tests
PMID: 28476115 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-017-0192-y
Self-tests for influenza: an empirical ethics investigation.
Rumbold B1, Wenham C2, Wilson J3.
Author information
Abstract
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.
KEYWORDS:
Diagnostics; Empirical ethics; Ethics; Influenza; Point-of-care tests; Self-tests
PMID: 28476115 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-017-0192-y