Integrating Philosophy of Science into Research on Ethical, Legal and Social Issues in the Life Sciences

Lohse, Simon; Wasmer, Martin; Reydon, Thomas A. C.

doi:10.1162/posc_a_00357

Cited by 10 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 112 publications

(111 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…An increasing number of publications is the result of collaborations between science scholars and scientists; philosophical work is increasingly relevant and cited in science journals [ 59 ]. In this context, approaches such as ELSI (Ethical, Legal and Social Issues) and E 2 LSI show the need for a systematic integration of epistemic, ethical, legal, and social considerations [ 60 ]. This is a particularly important step to take in the context of new and evolving technologies for digital health, as important decisions are being taken now on their regulation, inclusion in healthcare programmes, and use in research.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Challenges and recommendations for wearable devices in digital health: Data quality, interoperability, health equity, fairness

Canali

Schiaffonati²,

Aliverti³

2022

PLOS Digit Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wearable devices are increasingly present in the health context, as tools for biomedical research and clinical care. In this context, wearables are considered key tools for a more digital, personalised, preventive medicine. At the same time, wearables have also been associated with issues and risks, such as those connected to privacy and data sharing. Yet, discussions in the literature have mostly focused on either technical or ethical considerations, framing these as largely separate areas of discussion, and the contribution of wearables to the collection, development, application of biomedical knowledge has only partially been discussed. To fill in these gaps, in this article we provide an epistemic (knowledge-related) overview of the main functions of wearable technology for health: monitoring, screening, detection, and prediction. On this basis, we identify 4 areas of concern in the application of wearables for these functions: data quality, balanced estimations, health equity, and fairness. To move the field forward in an effective and beneficial direction, we present recommendations for the 4 areas: local standards of quality, interoperability, access, and representativity.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Challenges and recommendations for wearable devices in digital health: Data quality, interoperability, health equity, fairness

Canali

Schiaffonati²,

Aliverti³

2022

PLOS Digit Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the collaboration between ethics and science is not always a relationship of equals. Often, the approaches of ELSI and RRI follow the primacy of biomedicine, which dictates pace and topics (Lohse et al, 2020). The psychological humanities partially reverse this relationship and give greater autonomy to reflexive approaches.…”

Section: What Are Psychological Humanities?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, we should bring ethical discussions more to the forefront, highlighting the social responsibility of psychological research, its public communication and the integrity of its products. Such ethical discussions are partly implemented within the approaches of “ELSI – Ethical, Legal and Social Issues of Research” (Lohse et al, 2020; Rehmann-Sutter, 2011) and “RRI – Responsible Research and Innovation” (Stahl et al, 2021). These approaches have been established in the last decade and have been promoted by some funding institutions, such as the European Union.…”

Section: Psychological Humanities In the Wake Of The Replication Crisismentioning

confidence: 99%

Metascience Is Not Enough – A Plea for Psychological Humanities in the Wake of the Replication Crisis

Malich

Rehmann‐Sutter

2022

Review of General Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The replication crisis led to the rise of metascience as a possible solution. In this article, we examine central metascientific premises and argue that attempts to solve the replication crisis in psychology will benefit from a tighter integration of approaches from the psychological humanities. The first part of our article identifies central epistemic merits that metascientific endeavors can contribute to psychology. However, we argue secondly against the widespread claim that metascience is the only way to deal with the replication crisis in psychology and point to major epistemic problems: the one-sided notion of a singular scientific method, the homogenizing view of psychology, and the exclusion of practices of theorizing. As a possible compensation for such shortcomings, we introduce, third, the reflective and pluralistic approach of psychological humanities. In so doing, we show how psychological humanities can serve as an important complement to the objective of improving psychological research. Psychological humanities contribute to a more precise determination of validity, to ethical considerations, and a better understanding of psychology’s objects in regard to replication. Accordingly, we argue for the integration of psychological humanities into both metascience and psychology to provide a better basis for addressing epistemic and ethical questions.

show abstract

“…15,16 (3) The results of this review will also be useful for identifying normative implications of different aspects of uncertainty in precision medicine, thereby contributing to an integrated discussion of epistemic and ethical issues in precision medicine and, by implication, to socially responsible innovation and application in precision medicine. 17 In fact, this article takes initial steps in this direction, starting from an argument for the likely persistence of uncertainty in precision medicine that feeds into the existing discourse.…”

Section: Lohse | 555mentioning

confidence: 99%

Mapping uncertainty in precision medicine: A systematic scoping review

Lohse

2022

Evaluation Clinical Practice

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rationale Although precision medicine is seen by many as one of the most promising advances in the field of medicine, it has also raised critical questions at various levels. Many of these concerns revolve around an observation described by Kimmelman and Tannock as the ‘paradox of precision medicine’: somewhat surprisingly, uncertainty seems to be a key characteristic of precision medicine in practice. Aims and Objective To better understand this concept and the underlying issues, a scoping review was undertaken to search for factors stated in the literature as contributing to or being aspects of uncertainty in precision medicine. Methods A systematic search of the literature was conducted in three databases (Pubmed, Web of Science, and Jstor) and complemented with a systematic hand‐search. The initial search provided 1.252 items of which 51 articles for selected as eligible for further analysis. These articles were coded with MAXQDA and categorized into four main themes (a–d) of uncertainty. The main results were summarized and discussed with a view to the interrelations between different aspects and implications for precision medicine in practice. Results The mapping of different aspects and sources of uncertainty leads to the key result that ‘uncertainty’ should be understood as a cluster concept. Uncertainties are identified in many different respects and situated at different levels: Most complexity‐related issues (theme a) can best be understood as ontological (‘world‐sided’) aspects of the uncertainty paradox. Conceptual (theme b) and evidence‐related uncertainties (theme c) are situated on an epistemological or methodological level, addressing foundational and normative challenges related to knowledge production in precision medicine. Finally, theme (d) targets issues on the level of material precision medicine practices. These levels are helpful to understand the different dimensions of the uncertainty paradox. Conclusions Uncertainty may not merely be a transient effect of the novelty of the precision medicine paradigm. Rather, it should be seen as a consequence of the ontological, epistemological and practical complexity of precision medicine, implying that uncertainty will not necessarily be reduced by more research. This finding encourages further investigations to better understand the interactions among various factors and aspects of uncertainty in precision medicine and the resulting implications for research and medical practice.

show abstract

Integrating Philosophy of Science into Research on Ethical, Legal and Social Issues in the Life Sciences

Cited by 10 publications

References 112 publications

Challenges and recommendations for wearable devices in digital health: Data quality, interoperability, health equity, fairness

Challenges and recommendations for wearable devices in digital health: Data quality, interoperability, health equity, fairness

Metascience Is Not Enough – A Plea for Psychological Humanities in the Wake of the Replication Crisis

Mapping uncertainty in precision medicine: A systematic scoping review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About