Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.
Law School, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States.
J Med Internet Res. 2022 Feb 9;24(2):e31146. doi: 10.2196/31146.
Psychiatry has long needed a better and more scalable way to capture the dynamics of behavior and its disturbances, quantitatively across multiple data channels, at high temporal resolution in real time. By combining 24/7 data-on location, movement, email and text communications, and social media-with brain scans, genetics, genomics, neuropsychological batteries, and clinical interviews, researchers will have an unprecedented amount of objective, individual-level data. Analyzing these data with ever-evolving artificial intelligence could one day include bringing interventions to patients where they are in the real world in a convenient, efficient, effective, and timely way. Yet, the road to this innovative future is fraught with ethical dilemmas as well as ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI).
The goal of the Ethics Checklist is to promote careful design and execution of research. It is not meant to mandate particular research designs; indeed, at this early stage and without consensus guidance, there are a range of reasonable choices researchers may make. However, the checklist is meant to make those ethical choices explicit, and to require researchers to give reasons for their decisions related to ELSI issues. The Ethics Checklist is primarily focused on procedural safeguards, such as consulting with experts outside the research group and documenting standard operating procedures for clearly actionable data (eg, expressed suicidality) within written research protocols.
We explored the ELSI of digital health research in psychiatry, with a particular focus on what we label "deep phenotyping" psychiatric research, which combines the potential for virtually boundless data collection and increasingly sophisticated techniques to analyze those data. We convened an interdisciplinary expert stakeholder workshop in May 2020, and this checklist emerges out of that dialogue.
Consistent with recent ELSI analyses, we find that existing ethical guidance and legal regulations are not sufficient for deep phenotyping research in psychiatry. At present, there are regulatory gaps, inconsistencies across research teams in ethics protocols, and a lack of consensus among institutional review boards on when and how deep phenotyping research should proceed. We thus developed a new instrument, an Ethics Checklist for Digital Health Research in Psychiatry ("the Ethics Checklist"). The Ethics Checklist is composed of 20 key questions, subdivided into 6 interrelated domains: (1) informed consent; (2) equity, diversity, and access; (3) privacy and partnerships; (4) regulation and law; (5) return of results; and (6) duty to warn and duty to report.
Deep phenotyping research offers a vision for vastly more effective care for people with, or at risk for, psychiatric disease. The potential perils en route to realizing this vision are significant; however, and researchers must be willing to address the questions in the Ethics Checklist before embarking on each leg of the journey.
精神病学长期以来一直需要一种更好、更具可扩展性的方法来捕捉行为及其障碍的动态,在实时的情况下以高时间分辨率跨多个数据通道进行定量分析。通过将 24/7 的位置、运动、电子邮件和文本通信以及社交媒体数据与大脑扫描、遗传学、基因组学、神经心理学测试和临床访谈相结合,研究人员将拥有前所未有的大量客观的个体水平数据。通过不断发展的人工智能对这些数据进行分析,有朝一日可以将干预措施直接带到患者所在的现实世界,以方便、高效、有效和及时的方式。然而,这条通往创新未来的道路充满了伦理困境,以及伦理、法律和社会影响(ELSI)。
该伦理检查表的目标是促进研究的精心设计和执行。它并不是要强制规定特定的研究设计;实际上,在这个早期阶段,没有共识指导,研究人员可能会做出一系列合理的选择。但是,检查表旨在明确这些伦理选择,并要求研究人员就与 ELSI 问题相关的决策给出理由。该伦理检查表主要侧重于程序保障,例如咨询研究小组以外的专家,并在书面研究方案中记录明确可操作数据(例如,表达自杀意念)的标准操作程序。
我们探讨了精神病学中数字健康研究的 ELSI,特别关注我们称之为“深度表型”精神病学研究的问题,这种研究结合了几乎无限的数据收集潜力和越来越复杂的分析这些数据的技术。我们于 2020 年 5 月召开了一次跨学科专家利益相关者研讨会,本检查表就是这次对话的成果。
与最近的 ELSI 分析一致,我们发现现有的伦理指导和法律法规不足以满足精神病学中深度表型研究的需要。目前,在监管方面存在差距,研究团队之间的伦理协议不一致,机构审查委员会在何时以及如何进行深度表型研究方面也缺乏共识。因此,我们开发了一种新工具,即《精神病学中数字健康研究的伦理检查表》(“伦理检查表”)。该伦理检查表由 20 个关键问题组成,分为 6 个相互关联的领域:(1)知情同意;(2)公平、多样性和可及性;(3)隐私和伙伴关系;(4)监管和法律;(5)结果回报;(6)警告和报告义务。
深度表型研究为患有或有患精神病风险的人群提供了更有效的治疗方案。实现这一愿景的潜在风险巨大,然而,研究人员在开始旅程的每一步之前,都必须愿意回答伦理检查表中的问题。