Rumbold Benedict, Wenham Clare, Wilson James
Department of Philosophy, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, UK.
LSE Health and Social Care, Cowdray House, London School of Economics and Political Science, Houghton Street, London, WC2A 2AE, UK.
BMC Med Ethics. 2017 May 5;18(1):33. doi: 10.1186/s12910-017-0192-y.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Not applicable.
在本文中，我们旨在评估流感自我检测诊断试剂盒在伦理上的可取性，尤其关注一种新型的、基于手机的工具所带来的潜在益处和挑战。该工具目前由i-sense研发，i-sense是一个（主要）基于伦敦大学学院的跨学科研究合作项目，由工程和物理科学研究委员会资助。
我们的研究采用实证伦理学方法，通过三个焦点小组的定性数据，对这类技术所引发的伦理考量进行初步审查。
总体而言，我们梳理了一系列支持和反对使用这类技术的可能考量因素，综合了一系列二手文献中的证据，并识别出了一些之前被忽视的新考量因素。
我们认为，没有单一的考量因素能将这些技术标记为完全可允许或完全不可允许，相反，它们是有可能产生特定成本和收益的工具，而背景在决定这些方面很重要。在本文的后半部分，我们解释了这类技术的开发者可能如何设法降低此类成本，并反思了研究过程中实证伦理学方法可能存在的局限性。
不适用。
