Without Informed Consent

Belfrage, S. Henning

doi:10.4018/jte.2011070104

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There are, however, also arguments against letting people influence the use of their health data (see Belfrage, 2011 ). Arguments specifically against requiring that informed consent is obtained include that doing so generates negative consequences in the form of unreasonably high costs for some kinds of studies and leads to selection bias, hence slower progress or distorted results when it comes to medical evaluations or research ( Taylor, 2008 ; Rothstein, 2009 ; Belfrage, 2011 ). This means that even if there may be gains from giving patients and research participants (greater) influence over the use of their data, there are also costs tied to this.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Willingness to Share yet Maintain Influence: A Cross-Sectional Study on Attitudes in Sweden to the Use of Electronic Health Data

Belfrage¹,

Lynøe

Helgesson

2020

Public Health Ethics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We have investigated attitudes towards the use of health data among the Swedish population by analyzing data from a survey answered by 1645 persons. Health data are potentially useful for a variety of purposes. Yet information about health remains sensitive. A balance therefore has to be struck between these opposing considerations in a number of contexts. The attitudes among those whose data is concerned will influence the perceived legitimacy of policies regulating health data use. We aimed to investigate what views are held by the general public, and what aspects matter for the willingness to let one’s data be used not only for one’s own care but also for other purposes. We found that while there is a broad willingness to let one’s data be used, the possibility to influence that use is considered important. The study also indicated that when respondents are required to balance different interests, priority is typically given to compulsory schemes ensuring that data are available where needed, rather than voluntary participation and data protection. The policy implications to be drawn from this are not self-evident, however, since the fact that a majority has a certain attitude does not by itself determine the most adequate policy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Willingness to Share yet Maintain Influence: A Cross-Sectional Study on Attitudes in Sweden to the Use of Electronic Health Data

Belfrage¹,

Lynøe

Helgesson

2020

Public Health Ethics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The APS (2007) Code of Ethics standard A.3.1 states that clients must be fully informed of services being provided, unless it is unreasonable to obtain. What is unreasonable is not defined; however, possible considerations are explored by Belfrage (2011), including issues related to cost, collectivity, capacity, and counterproductiveness. If consent is to be informed, the APS Code of Ethics standard A.3.3 details requirements to meet this obligation.…”

Section: Contexts and Ethical Implications Of Using Communication Tec...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethical issues for psychologists using communication technology: An Australian perspective on service provision flexibility.

Davis

2014

Professional Psychology: Research and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Koocher (2007) argued that the development of communication technology used for psychological service provision drives a need to reevaluate ethical standards, and that the expanding role of psychology in society suggested flexibility in resolving ethical obligations was required. The current article aims to explore how flexible an approach should be adopted for psychological service provision that includes communication technology in light of ethical considerations. Taking an Australian perspective on professional standards, technology’s characteristics and effectiveness are considered along with its application within a number of contexts. An evaluation of ethical issues is made in terms of contracts with clients, competency, confidentiality, and the control of psychological practice. Evidence of communication technology’s ethical advantages are shown to be subject to a number of limitations, and risks are identified that present substantial hurdles. It is argued that technological advances introduce significant ethical challenges to psychologists; however, the context under which services are rendered influences flexibility in technology’s adoption. The implications are that professional bodies have a role in balancing access to communication technology, where psychologists need an interdisciplinary view of technology’s incipient ethical risks along with a critical evaluation of contextual factors. Future research that considers variation in service provision context is recommended for rethinking ethical codes and guidelines, expanding technology’s evidence-based efficacy, and identifying and ameliorating ethical risk in advancing areas such as cloud computing. A recommendation is also made to account for similar ethical concerns across cultures when developing communication technology tools for psychological service provision.

show abstract

“…It has been argued at length that it is impossible to inform the individual completely of all research to be conducted sample in the future, if only because the course of scientific endeavor is not predictable. It is therefore also unpredictable what personal and medical information will need to be used, what tests are performed on the sample, and what a person's de facto contribution to medical knowledgebuilding will be (Árnason, 2004;Belfrage, 2011;Caulfield, Upshur, & Daar, 2003;Hansson, Dillner, Bartram, Carlson, & Helgesson, 2006;Shickle, 2006).…”

Section: Biobanks and Ambiguous Politicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Technoethics and Public Reason

Valkenburg

2013

International Journal of Technoethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public reason specifies the rules under which a political community collectively conducts ethical reasoning. Technoethics needs to incorporate an account of how the technologies it aspires to govern bear on these rules. As the case of biobanks shows, technologies have the capacity to change the exact meanings of concepts that play central roles in ethical reasoning. By consequence, a revision of the rules to which this ethical reasoning about the very same biobanks is subject, becomes inevitable. Thus, reasoning in technoethics becomes essentially reflexive, as it is to discuss its own rules at the same level at which it discusses its primary object, namely new technologies. Technoethics is thus not only about how human values are to be incorporated into technology design, but also about what kind of political world is constructed through technology.

show abstract

Without Informed Consent

Cited by 4 publications

References 19 publications

Willingness to Share yet Maintain Influence: A Cross-Sectional Study on Attitudes in Sweden to the Use of Electronic Health Data

Willingness to Share yet Maintain Influence: A Cross-Sectional Study on Attitudes in Sweden to the Use of Electronic Health Data

Ethical issues for psychologists using communication technology: An Australian perspective on service provision flexibility.

Technoethics and Public Reason

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About