Citizen science or scientific citizenship? Disentangling the uses of public engagement rhetoric in national research initiatives

Community-Partnered Research appraisal tool for conducting, reporting and assessing community-based research

Objective The aim of this study was to develop an appraisal tool to support and promote clear, accurate and transparent standards and consistency when conducting, reporting and assessing community-based research. Design Current recommendations for developing reporting guidelines was used with three key differences: (1) an analysis of existing guides, principles and published literature about community engagement, involvement and participation in research using situational and relational maps; (2) feedback and pilot-testing by a community-based research team; and (3) testing the utility and usability of the appraisal tool. Results After a series of iterative revisions, the resulting Community-Partnered Research (CPR) appraisal tool emerged into three products: an elaborate prospective format, a basic retrospective format, and a supplemental checklist format. All three versions of the CPR appraisal tool consist of 11 main question items with corresponding prompts aimed to facilitate awareness, accountability, and transparency about processes and practices employed by professional researchers and community co-researchers throughout four phases of research: (1) partnership and planning, (2) methods, (3) results and (4) sustainment. Conclusion We hope that introducing this tool will contribute to shifting individual and systematic processes and practices towards equitable partnerships, mutual trustworthiness and empowerment among professional researchers and community co-researchers and, in turn, improving the quality of co-created knowledge that benefits communities and creates social change.

Implementing co-created citizen science in five environmental epidemiological studies in the CitieS-Health project

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Scientists and scientific institutions are adopting more extensive participatory models, hoping to revisit the existing relationship between science and society. Though citizen science has become more common in environmental monitoring, it is seldom utilized in environmental epidemiology. In the CitieS-Health project, we co-created epidemiological studies with citizens in five European countries. The aim of this paper is to share our experiences and impart methodological insight into the application of co-created citizen science strategies in environmental epidemiology.

METHODS

We applied the CitieS-Health framework, involving citizens in all the phases of the studies: identifying research questions, designing research protocols, collecting data, analysing data, interpreting data, formulating conclusions, authoring scientific articles and communicating the results to diverse audiences. These epidemiological studies, conducted in specific areas in Italy, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Slovenia and Spain, covered diverse local environmental issues and health effects ranging from air pollution and mental health to industrial pollution and kidney disease.

RESULTS

Together with citizens, we successfully conducted environmental epidemiological studies that generated new scientific knowledge reflecting the concerns and knowledge of citizens. Citizens contributed in all the research activities, including activities beyond formulating the research questions, though the researchers initiated several design discussions and conducted time-consuming and complex tasks (e.g. data analysis, measurement of specific exposures and health outcomes). The challenges we encountered were engaging effectively with citizens throughout the study, harmonizing citizens' knowledge and values with the academics' expertise, managing civic expectations, making complex concepts understandable to citizens and representativeness of participating citizens. The co-created studies were able to empower citizens to address local health concerns by sharing and using scientific knowledge generated from studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Integration of co-created citizen science in environmental epidemiology is feasible and has the potential to improve the quality of research whilst promoting civic trust in research and results.

Ethics of 'Counting Me In': framing the implications of direct-to-patient genomics research

Count Me In (CMI) was launched in 2015 as a patient-driven research initiative aimed at accelerating the study of cancer genomics through direct participant engagement, electronic consent and open-access data sharing. It is an example of a large-scale direct-to-patient (DTP) research project which has since enrolled thousands of individuals. Within the broad scope of 'citizen science', DTP genomics research is defined here as a specific form of 'top-down' research endeavour developed and overseen by institutions within the traditional human subjects research context; in novel ways, it engages and recruits patients with defined diseases, consents them for medical information and biospecimens sharing, and stores and disseminates genomic information. Importantly, these projects simultaneously aim to empower participants in the research process while increasing sample size, particularly in rare disease states. Using CMI as a case study, this paper discusses how DTP genomics research raises new questions in the context of traditional human subjects research ethics, including issues surrounding participant selection, remote consent, privacy and return of results. It aims to demonstrate how current research ethics frameworks may be insufficient in this context, and that institutions, institutional review boards and investigators should be aware of these gaps and their role in ensuring the conduct of ethical, novel forms of research together with participants. Ultimately, a broader question is raised of whether the rhetoric of participatory genomics research advocates for an ethic of personal and social duty for contributing to the advancement of generalisable knowledge about health and disease.

Genetic research and the collective good: participants as leaders to reconcile individual and public interests

This paper problematises the notions of public or common good as weighed against individual sovereignty in the context of medical research by focusing on genetic research. We propose the notion of collective good as the good of the particular collective in which the research was conducted. We conducted documentary and interview-based research with participant representatives and research leaders concerned with participant involvement in leading genetic research projects and around two recent genetic data controversies: the case of the UK Wellcome Sanger Institute, accused of planning unauthorised commercialisation of African DNA samples, and the case of the company Genuity Science, which planned genetic research on brain tumour samples in Ireland with no explicit patient consent. We advocate for greater specificity in circumscribing the collective to which genetic research relates and for greater efforts in including representatives of this collective as research coleaders in order to enable a more inclusive framing of the good arising from such research. Such community-based participant cogovernance and coleadership in genetic research is vital especially when minorities or vulnerable groups are involved, and it centrally requires community capacity building to help collectives articulate their own notions of the collective good.

The case for citizen science in public health policy and practice: a mixed methods study of policymaker and practitioner perspectives and experiences

BACKGROUND

Citizen science (CS) is increasingly being utilised to involve the public in public health research, but little is known about whether and how CS can address the needs of policy and practice stakeholders in health promotion and chronic disease prevention.

METHODS

Using a mixed methods approach we conducted an online survey (n = 83) and semi-structured interviews (n = 21) with policy and practice stakeholders across Australia to explore how CS approaches are perceived and applied in chronic disease prevention, how CS aligns with existing approaches to community engagement, and how the uptake of CS can be supported within policy and practice settings.

RESULTS

Most participants had heard of CS, and while few had experience of using CS, there was widespread support for this approach, with many seeing it as complementary to other community engagement approaches. CS was seen as providing: (a) a robust framework for engagement; (b) access to rich data; (c) opportunities for more meaningful engagement; and (d) a mutually beneficial approach for stakeholders and community members. However, stakeholders identified a need to weigh benefits against potential risks and challenges including competing organisational priorities, resourcing and expertise, data quality and rigour, governance, and engagement.

CONCLUSIONS

To expand the use of CS, stakeholders identified the need for increased awareness, acceptance, and capacity for CS within public health organisations, greater access to supporting tools and technology, and evidence on processes, feasibility and impacts to enhance the visibility and legitimacy of CS approaches.

The ethical and legal landscape of brain data governance

Neuroscience research is producing big brain data which informs both advancements in neuroscience research and drives the development of advanced datasets to provide advanced medical solutions. These brain data are produced under different jurisdictions in different formats and are governed under different regulations. The governance of data has become essential and critical resulting in the development of various governance structures to ensure that the quality, availability, findability, accessibility, usability, and utility of data is maintained. Furthermore, data governance is influenced by various ethical and legal principles. However, it is still not clear what ethical and legal principles should be used as a standard or baseline when managing brain data due to varying practices and evolving concepts. Therefore, this study asks what ethical and legal principles shape the current brain data governance landscape? A systematic scoping review and thematic analysis of articles focused on biomedical, neuro and brain data governance was carried out to identify the ethical and legal principles which shape the current brain data governance landscape. The results revealed that there is currently a large variation of how the principles are presented and discussions around the terms are very multidimensional. Some of the principles are still at their infancy and are barely visible. A range of principles emerged during the thematic analysis providing a potential list of principles which can provide a more comprehensive framework for brain data governance and a conceptual expansion of neuroethics.

An Ethics Framework for Evaluating Ownership Practices in Biomedical Citizen Science

The collaborative nature of citizen science raises important questions about managing ownership of its research outputs. Potential citizen science research outputs include data sets, findings, publications, and discoveries of new ideas, methods, products, and technologies. Unlike citizen science projects conducted in other disciplines, biomedical citizen science projects often include features, such as contribution of personal health data, that might heighten citizen scientists' expectations that they will be able to access, control, or share in the benefits of project outputs. Here, we refer to moral claims of access, control, and benefit as ownership claims, and a project's management of ownership claims as its ownership practices. Ethical management of ownership is widely recognized as an important consideration for citizen science projects, and practitioners and scholars have described helpful recommendations for preempting issues and engaging stakeholders on practices. Building on this literature, we propose a framework to help biomedical citizen science projects systematically evaluate the ethical soundness of their ownership practices based on four considerations: reciprocal treatment, relative treatment, risk-benefit assessment, and reasonable expectations.

No person left behind: Mapping the health policy landscape for genomics research in the Caribbean

The Caribbean has long been an under-represented geographical region in the field of genomics research. Such under-representation may result in Caribbean people being underserved by precision medicine and other public health benefits of genomics. A collaboration among regional and international researchers aims to address this issue through the H3ECaribbean project (Human Heredity, Environment, and Health in the Caribbean), which builds on the lessons and success of H3Africa. The Caribbean project aims to target issues of social justice by encouraging the inclusion of diverse Caribbean communities in genomics research. This paper explores a framework for the ethical and socially acceptable conduct of genomics research in the Caribbean, taking account of the cultural peculiarities of the region. This is done in part by exploring research ethics issues identified in indigenous communities in North America, Small Island Developing States, and similar endeavours from the African continent. The framework provides guidance for interacting with local community leaders, as well as detailing steps for obtaining informed consent of all participants. Specifically, the authors outline the methods to ensure effective interaction and enforce full transparency with study participants to combat historical neglect when working with under-represented communities in the Caribbean.

Standardised data on initiatives-STARDIT: Beta version

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

There is currently no standardised way to share information across disciplines about initiatives, including fields such as health, environment, basic science, manufacturing, media and international development. All problems, including complex global problems such as air pollution and pandemics require reliable data sharing between disciplines in order to respond effectively. Current reporting methods also lack information about the ways in which different people and organisations are involved in initiatives, making it difficult to collate and appraise data about the most effective ways to involve different people. The objective of STARDIT (Standardised Data on Initiatives) is to address current limitations and inconsistencies in sharing data about initiatives. The STARDIT system features standardised data reporting about initiatives, including who has been involved, what tasks they did, and any impacts observed. STARDIT was created to help everyone in the world find and understand information about collective human actions, which are referred to as 'initiatives'. STARDIT enables multiple categories of data to be reported in a standardised way across disciplines, facilitating appraisal of initiatives and aiding synthesis of evidence for the most effective ways for people to be involved in initiatives. This article outlines progress to date on STARDIT; current usage; information about submitting reports; planned next steps and how anyone can become involved.

METHOD

STARDIT development is guided by participatory action research paradigms, and has been co-created with people from multiple disciplines and countries. Co-authors include cancer patients, people affected by rare diseases, health researchers, environmental researchers, economists, librarians and academic publishers. The co-authors also worked with Indigenous peoples from multiple countries and in partnership with an organisation working with Indigenous Australians.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Over 100 people from multiple disciplines and countries have been involved in co-designing STARDIT since 2019. STARDIT is the first open access web-based data-sharing system which standardises the way that information about initiatives is reported across diverse fields and disciplines, including information about which tasks were done by which stakeholders. STARDIT is designed to work with existing data standards. STARDIT data will be released into the public domain (CC0) and integrated into Wikidata; it works across multiple languages and is both human and machine readable. Reports can be updated throughout the lifetime of an initiative, from planning to evaluation, allowing anyone to be involved in reporting impacts and outcomes. STARDIT is the first system that enables sharing of standardised data about initiatives across disciplines. A working Beta version was publicly released in February 2021 (ScienceforAll.World/STARDIT). Subsequently, STARDIT reports have been created for peer-reviewed research in multiple journals and multiple research projects, demonstrating the usability. In addition, organisations including Cochrane and Australian Genomics have created prospective reports outlining planned initiatives.

CONCLUSIONS

STARDIT can help create high-quality standardised information on initiatives trying to solve complex multidisciplinary global problems.

The Role of Urban Environments in Promoting Active and Healthy Aging: A Systematic Scoping Review of Citizen Science Approaches

Promoting active and healthy aging in urban spaces requires environments with diverse, age-friendly characteristics. This scoping review investigated the associations between urban characteristics and active and healthy aging as identified by citizen science (CS) and other participatory approaches. Using a systematic scoping review procedure, 23 articles employing a CS or participatory approach (participant age range: 54-98 years) were reviewed. An inductive and deductive thematic analysis was completed to (a) identify local urban barriers and facilitators and (b) map them against the World Health Organization (WHO) Checklist of Essential Features of Age-Friendly Cities. A new Citizen Science Appraisal Tool (CSAT) was developed to evaluate the quality of CS and other participatory approaches included in the reviewed articles. A range of interconnected urban barriers and facilitators was generated by residents across the personal (e.g. perceived safety), environmental (e.g. unmaintained infrastructure), socio-cultural (e.g. cross-cultural activities), economic (e.g. affordable housing) and political (e.g. governmental support to migrant communities) domains. Mapping the barriers and facilitators to the WHO age-friendly checklist underscored the checklist's relevance and elucidated the need to explore barriers for migrant and cross-cultural communities and neighborhood development and alterations. The CSAT demonstrated strengths related to active engagement of residents and study outcomes leading to real-world implications. To advance the potential of CS to enrich our understanding of age-friendly environments, employing co-production to enhance relevance and sustainability of outcomes is an important strategy. Overall, employing CS highlighted the value of systematically capturing the experiences of older adults within studies aimed at promoting active and healthy aging.

A Scoping Review of Citizen Science Approaches in Chronic Disease Prevention

Background

Citizen science approaches, which involve members of the public as active collaborators in scientific research, are increasingly being recognized for their potential benefits in chronic disease prevention. However, understanding the potential applicability, feasibility and impacts of these approaches is necessary if they are to be more widely used. This study aimed to synthesize research that has applied and evaluated citizen science approaches in chronic disease prevention and identify key questions, gaps, and opportunities to inform future work in this field.

Methods

We searched six databases (Scopus, Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, PubMed, and CINAHL) in January 2022 to identify articles on the use of citizen science in prevention. We extracted and synthesized data on key characteristics of citizen science projects, including topics, aims and level of involvement of citizen scientists, as well as methods and findings of evaluations of these projects.

Results

Eighty-one articles reported on citizen science across a variety of health issues, predominantly physical activity and/or nutrition. Projects primarily aimed to identify problems from the perspective of community members; generate and prioritize solutions; develop, test or evaluate interventions; or build community capacity. Most projects were small-scale, and few were co-produced with policy or practice stakeholders. While around half of projects included an evaluation component, overall, there was a lack of robust, in-depth evaluations of the processes and impacts of citizen science projects.

Conclusions

Citizen science approaches are increasingly being used in chronic disease prevention to identify and prioritize community-focused solutions, mobilize support and advocacy, and empower communities to take action to support their health and wellbeing. However, to realize the potential of this approach more attention needs to be paid to demonstrating the feasibility of using citizen science approaches at scale, and to rigorous evaluation of impacts from using these approaches for the diverse stakeholders involved.

Ethics framework for citizen science and public and patient participation in research

Background

Citizen science and models for public participation in health research share normative ideals of participation, inclusion, and public and patient engagement. Academic researchers collaborate in research with members of the public involved in an issue, maximizing all involved assets, competencies, and knowledge. In citizen science new ethical issues arise, such as who decides, who participates, who is excluded, what it means to share power equally, or whose knowledge counts. This article aims to present an ethics framework that offers a lens of understanding and heuristic guidelines to deal with ethical issues in citizen science.

Methods

We conducted seven case studies between 2015 and 2021 to attune and validate the ethics framework for the context of citizen science. The cases related to studies with older adults, people with a psychiatric vulnerability, people dependent on community care, people who are unemployed or living in poverty or both, and young adults with respiratory disease.

Results

Ethics in citizen science reaches beyond the ethical issues in traditional biomedical and health research. It entails more than following procedures about informed consent and privacy and submitting a proposal to a Medical Research Ethics Committee. Ethics in citizen science relates to everyday ethical issues during the study, including relational and moral complexities concerning collaboration, sharing power, and democratic decision-making. Dealing with these issues requires ethics work of researchers. This entails seeing ethically salient issues and reflecting on everyday ethical issues. Ethics work consists of seven features: framing work, role work, emotion work, identity work, reason work, relationship work, and performance work. All are relevant for researchers in citizen science.

Conclusions

Ethical issues in citizen science often relate to power differentials, partnership, and collaboration between academics and non-academics. The ethics framework prepares researchers for the work needed in citizen science to act responsibly and offers a heuristic guide to reflect on ethics. Reflection on ethics is a pathway towards ethical citizen science, especially if researchers collaboratively reflect in partnership with non-academics who are subject to the moral issue.

Auditing the ‘Social’ of Quantum Technologies: A Scoping Review

Various phrases such as “social implications”, social impact” and “ethical, legal and social implications” are used to indicate the impact of a given scientific or technological advancements on the ‘social’. The impact on the ‘social’ is one focus of science and technology governance discussions. Many terms and phrases can be used to audit the engagement of a given technology (such as quantum technologies) with the ‘social’. Marginalized groups are particularly impacted by the ‘social’. Equity, Diversity, and, Inclusion (EDI) and similar phrases are part of discussing the ‘social’. EDI frameworks and phrases are employed as policy concepts to decrease the research, education, and general workplace problems members of marginalized groups such as women, Indigenous peoples, visible/racialized minorities, disabled people, and LGBTQ2S+ encounter at universities and other workplaces. How quantum technologies-focused discussions engage with the ‘social’ can impact EDI activities, and quantum technologies-focused discussions can be impacted in turn by EDI activities. The objective of this study was to map the engagement with the ‘social’ in the quantum technologies-focused academic literature. A scoping review coupled with a manifest coding approach was used to answer three research questions: (1) Which terms, phrases, and measures that can be seen to cover aspects of the ‘social’ are present in the quantum technologies-focused academic literature? (2) To what extent are EDI frameworks and phrases present in the quantum technologies-focused academic literature? (3) Which marginalized groups visible in EDI discourses are covered in the quantum technologies-focused academic literature? Using the academic databases SCOPUS, EBSCO-HOST, Web of Science, Compendex, Inspec Archive, and Knovel, 362,728 English language abstracts were obtained for the manifest coding using 62 Quantum-related technical phrases and 1062 English language abstracts were obtained using 17 non-technical Quantum-related phrases. Within the 362,728 abstracts of the 200 terms and phrases (which did not have to contain the term “social”) used to answer the research questions, 87 were not mentioned in any abstracts, 47 were mentioned in less than 10, 30 were mentioned in between 10 and 100, and 29 were mentioned in over 100 abstracts. Within the 1062 abstracts, 164 terms and phrases were not mentioned at all, 19 were mentioned in over 10, 8 were mentioned in between 10 and 100 (all false positive), and one was mentioned in over 100 abstracts (false positive). The term “social” or phrases containing “social” appeared in only 867 of the 362,728 abstracts and only 10 of the 1062 abstracts. EDI frameworks and phrases were not present in the 362,728 abstracts and 1062 abstracts, and many marginalized groups engaged with in EDI discussions were not present in the 362,728 and 1062 abstracts either. The results reveal vast opportunities to engage with the ‘social’ of quantum technologies in many different ways, including through EDI frameworks and concepts and by engaging with marginalized groups covered under EDI.

Mapping the State of the Art to Envision the Future of Large-Scale Citizen Science Projects: An Interpretive Review

Citizen science, i.e. citizens’ involvement in research activities, is achieving an increasing relevance across disparate scientific domains. However, literature is not consistent in arguing citizen science’s attributes and implications when large-scale projects are concerned. The paper systematizes extant scientific knowledge in this field and identifies avenues for further developments through a bibliometric analysis and an interpretive review. Various approaches to citizen science are implemented to engage citizens in scientific research. They can be located in a continuum composed of two extremes: a contributory approach, which serves research institutions’ needs, and an open science approach, which focuses on citizens’ active participation in knowledge co-creation. Although contributory citizen science paves the way for participatory science, it falls short in empowering citizens, which is central in the open science approach. Interventions aimed at enabling citizens to have an active role in co-creating knowledge in a perspective of science democratization are key to overcoming the understanding of citizen science as a low-cost model of scientific research and to boost the transition towards an open science approach.

Coverage of Disabled People in Environmental-Education-Focused Academic Literature

Environmental education (EE) is a lifelong process to acquire knowledge and skills that can influence pro-environmental behavior, environmental activism, and disaster-risk management. Disabled people are impacted by environmental issues, environmental activism, and how EE is taught. Disabled people can be learners within EE but can contribute to EE in many other roles. Given the importance of EE and its potential impact on disabled people—and given that equity, diversity, and inclusion is an ever-increasing policy framework in relation to environment-focused disciplines and programs in academia and other workplaces, which also covers disabled people—we performed a scoping review of academic literature using Scopus and EBSCO-HOST (70 databases) as sources, to investigate how and to what extent disabled people are engaged with EE academic literature. Of the initial 73 sources found, only 27 contained relevant content whereby the content engaged mostly with disabled people as EE learners but rarely with other possible roles. They rarely discussed the EE impact on disabled people, did not engage with EE teaching about disabled people being impacted by environmental issues and discourses, and did not connect EE to environment-related action by disabled people. Results suggest the need for a more differentiated engagement with disabled people in the EE literature.

Undergraduate Disabled Students as Knowledge Producers Including Researchers: Perspectives of Disabled Students

Knowledge influences policy development and policies impact disabled people. Scientific and technological advancements, including neuro-advancements and their governance, have social implications for disabled people. However, knowledge is missing on this topic. Although efforts are underway to increase the number of disabled academics, the numbers remain low. Engaging undergraduate disabled students in knowledge production, especially research, could decrease the knowledge deficit and increase the pool of disabled students considering an academic career. We performed 10 semi-structured interviews of disabled students to understand the reality of undergraduate disabled students as knowledge producers, including researchers. Using a directed thematic content analysis, we found that participants felt that undergraduate disabled students were insufficiently exposed to and supported in the identity of being knowledge producers including researchers. Participants identified ethical, legal, and social implications of science and technology and argued that undergraduate disabled students and disabled people have a role to play in the discussions of these. Exposing disabled students at the undergraduate and high school level to knowledge production including researcher identity could increase the numbers of undergraduate disabled researchers, disabled academics, and disabled students doing research in the community after graduation and decrease the knowledge gaps around the social situation of disabled people.

Participatory autism research: Early career and established researchers' views and experiences

LAY ABSTRACT

'Participatory autism research' refers to ways of involving autistic people and their allies (e.g. family members) in making decisions about research. These decisions can include what research gets done, how it gets done and how research findings are used. While there is more and more interest in participatory autism research, we know little about how researchers at different stages of their careers use this approach. To find out more, we discussed these issues with 25 researchers. Fourteen of these were at an early stage of their careers, and 11 were more senior researchers. We spoke to people in individual interviews or in groups. We then used a technique called thematic analysis to analyse our data, which involved us looking for common topics or 'themes' discussed by our participants. What did we find? Our participants told us that participatory autism research was a flexible approach, meaning that autistic people can be involved in research in many different ways. While people viewed this flexibility in a positive way, it also caused some confusion about what does or does not 'count' as participatory research. Our participants also spoke about how important it was to build relationships with those involved in their research, but they also said it could be difficult to communicate well with diverse groups of people who may not have much experience of research. Finally, our participants said it was hard to do participatory research when there was not much time, funding or support available to researchers. In this article, we discuss these findings, focusing on what needs to change to ensure that autistic people and their allies are meaningfully involved in autism research.

Designing Equitable, Transparent Community-Engaged Disaster Research

Disaster research faces significant infrastructure challenges: regional and federal coordination, access to resources, and community collaboration. Disasters can lead to chemical exposures that potentially impact human health and cause concern in affected communities. Community-engaged research, which incorporates local knowledge and voices, is well-suited for work with communities that experience impacts of environmental exposures following disasters. We present three examples of community-engaged disaster research (CEnDR) following oil spills, hurricanes, and wildfires, and their impact on long-term social, physical, and technical community infrastructure. We highlight the following CEnDR structures: researcher/community networks; convenient research tools; adaptable data collection modalities for equitable access; and return of data.

“Data is the new oil”: citizen science and informed consent in an era of researchers handling of an economically valuable resource

As with other areas of the social world, academic research in the contemporary healthcare setting has undergone adaptation and change. For example, research methods are increasingly incorporating citizen participation in the research process, and there has been an increase in collaborative research that brings academic and industry partners together. There have been numerous positive outcomes associated with both of these growing methodological and collaborative processes; nonetheless, both bring with them ethical considerations that require careful thought and attention. This paper addresses the ethical considerations that research teams must consider when using participatory methods and/or when working with industry and outlines a novel informed consent matrix designed to maintain the high ethical standard to which academic research in the healthcare arena has traditionally adhered.

Self-evaluating participatory research projects: A content validation of the InSPIRES online impact evaluation tool

Research projects involving science shops and citizen science in their promotion of participatory approaches are flourishing globally. However, an instrument evaluating the impacts of such approaches at different stages of a participatory research processes has yet to be validated. The InSPIRES H2020 project developed an impact evaluation tool for just this purpose, consisting of 64 items that reflect upon the dimensions of knowledge democracy, citizen-led research, participatory dynamics, transformative change, and integrity. In this article, we seek to test the content validity of this tool and to provide recommendations that can ensure its validity. A panel of nine experts was created to evaluate each item as regards the following three criteria: representativeness, relevance, and clarity. The Aiken’s V and Wilson Score methods were used to assess the tool’s content validity based on the experts’ ratings. Experts’ written comments were also reviewed. At the panel level, 75% of the items were considered satisfactory in relation to each of the three validity criteria. However, at the population level, 72% of the items suggested that parts of the tool were not valid and required revision. The main suggestions from the experts pointed to the need to reformulate items in which the separation between science and society appeared reinforced and to develop more items about the gender perspective of a research project. The revised version of the tool should serve as a well-founded, comprehensive evaluation instrument for on-going and future projects whose goal is to self-reflect and compare participatory research processes.

A best-worst scaling experiment to prioritize concern about ethical issues in citizen science reveals heterogeneity on people-level v. data-level issues

"Citizen science" refers to the participation of lay individuals in scientific studies and other activities having scientific objectives. Citizen science gives rise to unique ethical issues that stem from the potentially multifaceted contributions of citizen scientists to the research process. We sought to explore the ethical issues that are most concerning to citizen scientist practitioners, participants, and scholars to support ethical practices in citizen science. We developed a best-worst scaling experiment using a balanced incomplete block design and fielded it with respondents recruited through the U.S.-based Citizen Science Association. Respondents were shown repeated subsets of 11 ethical issues and identified the most and least concerning issues in each subset. Latent class analysis revealed two respondent classes. The "Power to the People" class was most concerned about power imbalance between project leaders and participants, exploitation of participants, and lack of diverse participation. The "Show Me the Data" class was most concerned about the quality of data generated by citizen science projects and failure of projects to share data and other research outputs.

A Novel Model for Generating Creative, Community-Responsive Interventions to Reduce Gender-Based Violence on College Campuses

Currently, the most successful prevention interventions against sexual violence (SV) on United States college campuses target modifications at the individual and interpersonal levels. Community-level interventions have been under-developed for college campuses. To address this gap, we employ a citizen science model for understanding campus community factors affecting SV risk. The model, called Our Voice, starts by engaging groups of college students to collect data in their own communities, identifying factors they view as increasing the risk of SV. In facilitated meetings, participants then review and analyze their collective data and use it to generate actionable community-level solutions and advocate for them with local decision-makers. We share findings from a first-generation study of the Our Voice model applied to SV prevention on one college campus, and include recommendations for further research.

Digital Technologies and Data Science as Health Enablers: An Outline of Appealing Promises and Compelling Ethical, Legal, and Social Challenges

Digital technologies and data science have laid down the promise to revolutionize healthcare by transforming the way health and disease are analyzed and managed in the future. Digital health applications in healthcare include telemedicine, electronic health records, wearable, implantable, injectable and ingestible digital medical devices, health mobile apps as well as the application of artificial intelligence and machine learning algorithms to medical and public health prognosis and decision-making. As is often the case with technological advancement, progress in digital health raises compelling ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI). This article aims to succinctly map relevant ELSI of the digital health field. The issues of patient autonomy; assessment, value attribution, and validation of health innovation; equity and trustworthiness in healthcare; professional roles and skills and data protection and security are highlighted against the backdrop of the risks of dehumanization of care, the limitations of machine learning-based decision-making and, ultimately, the future contours of human interaction in medicine and public health. The running theme to this article is the underlying tension between the promises of digital health and its many challenges, which is heightened by the contrasting pace of scientific progress and the timed responses provided by law and ethics. Digital applications can prove to be valuable allies for human skills in medicine and public health. Similarly, ethics and the law can be interpreted and perceived as more than obstacles, but also promoters of fairness, inclusiveness, creativity and innovation in health.

Citizens, Scientists, and Enablers: A Tripartite Model for Citizen Science Projects

In this paper, we focus on different roles in citizen science projects, and their respective relationships. We propose a tripartite model that recognises not only citizens and scientists, but also an important third role, which we call the ‘enabler’. In doing so, we acknowledge that additional expertise and skillsets are often present in citizen science projects, but are frequently overlooked in associated literature. We interrogate this model by applying it to three case studies and explore how the success and sustainability of a citizen science project requires all roles to be acknowledged and interacting appropriately. In this era of ‘wicked problems’, the nature of science and science communication has become more complex. In order to address critical emerging issues, a greater number of stakeholders are engaging in multi-party partnerships and research is becoming increasingly interdisciplinary. Within this context, explicitly acknowledging the role and motivations of everyone involved can provide a framework for enhanced project transparency, delivery, evaluation and impact. By adapting our understanding of citizen science to better recognise the complexity of the organisational systems within which they operate, we propose an opportunity to strengthen the collaborative delivery of both valuable scientific research and public engagement.

Narrative review of citizen science in environmental epidemiology: Setting the stage for co-created research projects in environmental epidemiology

Several citizen science (CS) initiatives have been adopted in environmental science to monitor air and noise pollution, and water quality related to civic concerns. Nevertheless, CS projects in environmental epidemiology remain scarce. This is because little attention has been paid to evaluate associations of environmental exposures with health effects directly. This narrative review aims to promote the understanding and application of CS in environmental epidemiology. There are many commonalities between CS and other participatory approaches in environmental epidemiology. Yet, CS can foster the democratization of scientific governance and enhance the sustainability of research projects more effectively than other existing participatory approaches. This is especially the case in projects where citizens are invited to participate, engage and become involved throughout all the phases of a research project (co-created projects). This paper identifies various challenges and opportunities specific to the implementation of co-created CS projects in environmental epidemiology. The development of more locally relevant research designs, using local knowledge, obtaining medical ethical clearance, and co-analysing the association between exposure and health, are examples of opportunities and challenges that require epidemiologists to go beyond the traditional research framework and include more outreach activities. Continued efforts, particularly the sharing of information about projects' collaborative processes, are needed to make CS a more concrete and cohesive approach in environmental epidemiology.

Governing Personalized Health: A Scoping Review

Genetic research is advancing rapidly. One important area for the application of the results from this work is personalized health. These are treatments and preventive interventions tailored to the genetic profile of specific groups or individuals. The inclusion of personalized health in existing health systems is a challenge for policymakers. In this article, we present the results of a thematic scoping review of the literature dealing with governance and policy of personalized health. Our analysis points to four governance challenges that decisionmakers face against the background of personalized health. First, researchers have highlighted the need to further extend and harmonize existing research infrastructures in order to combine different types of genetic data. Second, decisionmakers face the challenge to create trust in personalized health applications, such as genetic tests. Third, scholars have pointed to the importance of the regulation of data production and sharing to avoid discrimination of disadvantaged groups and to facilitate collaboration. Fourth, researchers have discussed the challenge to integrate personalized health into regulatory-, financing-, and service provision structures of existing health systems. Our findings summarize existing research and help to guide further policymaking and research in the field of personalized health governance.

Technical assistance in the field of risk communication

This report assesses peer-reviewed and grey literature on risk communication concepts and practices, as requested by the European Commission to support the implementation of a 'General Plan for Risk Communication', i.e. an integrated framework for EU food safety risk assessors and risk managers at Union and national level, as required by the revised EU General Food Law Regulation. We conducted a scoping review of social research studies and official reports in relation to risk communication in the following areas: understanding and awareness of risk analysis roles and tasks, reducing misunderstanding of the different meaning of the terms 'hazard' and 'risk', tackling misinformation and disinformation, enhancing confidence in EU food safety, taking account of risk perceptions, key factors in trade-offs about risks, audience segmentation and tools, channels and mechanisms for coordinated risk communications. We structured our findings as follows: i) definitions of key concepts, ii) audience analysis and information requirements, iii) risk profiling, models and mechanisms, iv) contributions to communication strategies. We make several recommendations for consideration by the Commission, both in terms of actions to support the design and implementation of the general plan, and research needs that we consider crucial to further inform appropriate risk communication in the EU. EFSA carried out a targeted consultation of experts and a public consultation open to all interested parties including the general public, in preparing and finalising this report.

Scaling up public mental health care in Sub-Saharan Africa: insights from infectious disease

INTRODUCTION

Models estimate that the disability burden from mental disorders in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) will more than double in the next 40 years. Similar to HIV, mental disorders are stigmatized in many SSA settings and addressing them requires community engagement and long-term treatment. Yet, in contrast to HIV, the public mental healthcare cascade has not been sustained, despite robust data on scalable strategies. We draw on findings from our International AIDS Society (IAS) 2020 virtual workshop and make recommendations for next steps in the scale up of the SSA public mental healthcare continuum.

DISCUSSION

Early HIV surveillance and care cascade targets are discussed as important strategies for HIV response in SSA that should be adopted for mental health. Advocacy, including engagement with civil society, and targeted economic arguments to policymakers, are reviewed in the context of HIV success in SSA. Parallel opportunities for mental disorders are identified. Learning from HIV, communication of strategies that advance mental health care needs in SSA must be prioritized for broad global audiences.

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic is setting off a colossal escalation of global mental health care needs, well-publicized across scientific, media, policymaker, and civil society domains. The pandemic highlights disparities in healthcare access and reinvigorates the push for universal coverage. Learning from HIV strategies, we must seize this historical moment to improve the public mental health care cascade in SSA and capitalize on the powerful alliances ready to be forged. As noted by Ambassador Goosby in our AIDS 2020 workshop, 'The time is now'.

Citizen Neuroscience: Brain-Computer Interface Researcher Perspectives on Do-It-Yourself Brain Research

Devices that record from and stimulate the brain are currently available for consumer use. The increasing sophistication and resolution of these devices provide consumers with the opportunity to engage in do-it-yourself brain research and contribute to neuroscience knowledge. The rise of do-it-yourself (DIY) neuroscience may provide an enriched fund of neural data for researchers, but also raises difficult questions about data quality, standards, and the boundaries of scientific practice. We administered an online survey to brain-computer interface (BCI) researchers to gather their perspectives on DIY brain research. While BCI researcher concerns about data quality and reproducibility were high, the possibility of expert validation of data generated by citizen neuroscientists mitigated concerns. We discuss survey results in the context of an established ethical framework for citizen science, and describe the potential of constructive collaboration between citizens and researchers to both increase data collection and advance understanding of how the brain operates outside the confines of the lab.

Credit for and Control of Research Outputs in Genomic Citizen Science

Citizen science encompasses activities with scientific objectives in which members of the public participate as more than passive research subjects from whom personal data or biospecimens are collected and analyzed by others. Citizen science is increasingly common in the biomedical sciences, including the fields of genetics and human genomics. Genomic citizen science initiatives are diverse and involve citizen scientists in collecting genetic data, solving genetic puzzles, and conducting experiments in community laboratories. At the same time that genomic citizen science is presenting new opportunities for individuals to participate in scientific discovery, it is also challenging norms regarding the manner in which scientific research outputs are managed. In this review, we present a typology of genomic citizen science initiatives, describe ethical and legal foundations for recognizing genomic citizen scientists' claims of credit for and control of research outputs, and detail how such claims are or might be addressed in practice across a variety of initiatives.

Landscape of Participant-Centric Initiatives for Medical Research in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Japan: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Information and communication technology (ICT) has made remarkable progress in recent years and is being increasingly applied to medical research. This technology has the potential to facilitate the active involvement of research participants. Digital platforms that enable participants to be involved in the research process are called participant-centric initiatives (PCIs). Several PCIs have been reported in the literature, but no scoping reviews have been carried out. Moreover, detailed methods and features to aid in developing a clear definition of PCIs have not been sufficiently elucidated to date.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this scoping review is to describe the recent trends in, and features of, PCIs across the United States, the United Kingdom, and Japan.

METHODS

We applied a methodology suggested by Levac et al to conduct this scoping review. We searched electronic databases-MEDLINE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online), Embase (Excerpta Medica Database), CINAHL (Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature), PsycINFO, and Ichushi-Web-and sources of grey literature, as well as internet search engines-Google and Bing. We hand-searched through key journals and reference lists of the relevant articles. Medical research using ICT was eligible for inclusion if there was a description of the active involvement of the participants.

RESULTS

Ultimately, 21 PCIs were identified that have implemented practical methods and modes of various communication activities, such as patient forums and use of social media, in the field of medical research. Various methods of decision making that enable participants to become involved in setting the agenda were also evident.

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review is the first study to analyze the detailed features of PCIs and how they are being implemented. By clarifying the modes and methods of various forms of communication and decision making with patients, this review contributes to a better understanding of patient-centric involvement, which can be facilitated by PCIs.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

RR2-10.2196/resprot.7407.

Research data management in health and biomedical citizen science: practices and prospects

Background

Public engagement in health and biomedical research is being influenced by the paradigm of citizen science. However, conventional health and biomedical research relies on sophisticated research data management tools and methods. Considering these, what contribution can citizen science make in this field of research? How can it follow research protocols and produce reliable results?

Objective

The aim of this article is to analyze research data management practices in existing biomedical citizen science studies, so as to provide insights for members of the public and of the research community considering this approach to research.

Methods

A scoping review was conducted on this topic to determine data management characteristics of health and bio medical citizen science research. From this review and related web searching, we chose five online platforms and a specific research project associated with each, to understand their research data management approaches and enablers.

Results

Health and biomedical citizen science platforms and projects are diverse in terms of types of work with data and data management activities that in themselves may have scientific merit. However, consistent approaches in the use of research data management models or practices seem lacking, or at least are not prevalent in the review.

Conclusions

There is potential for important data collection and analysis activities to be opaque or irreproducible in health and biomedical citizen science initiatives without the implementation of a research data management model that is transparent and accessible to team members and to external audiences. This situation might be improved with participatory development of standards that can be applied to diverse projects and platforms, across the research data life cycle.

Setting the research agenda for living with and beyond cancer with comorbid illness: reflections on a research prioritisation exercise

BACKGROUND

People living with and beyond cancer are more likely to have comorbid conditions and poorer mental and physical health, but there is a dearth of in-depth research exploring the psychosocial needs of people experiencing cancer and comorbid chronic conditions. A patient partnership approach to research prioritisation and planning can ensure outcomes meaningful to those affected and can inform policy and practice accordingly, but can be challenging.

METHODS

We aimed to inform priorities for qualitative inquiry into the experiences and support needs of people living with and beyond cancer with comorbid illness using a partnership approach. A three-step process including a patient workshop to develop a consultation document, online consultation with patients, and academic expert consultation was carried out. The research prioritisation process was also appraised and reflected upon.

RESULTS

Six people attended the workshop, ten responded online and eight academic experts commented on the consultation document. Five key priorities were identified for exploration in subsequent qualitative studies, including the diagnostic journey, the burden of symptoms, managing medications, addressing the needs of informal carers, and service provision. Limitations of patient involvement and reflections on procedural ethics, and the challenge of making measurable differences to patient outcomes were discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings from this research prioritisation exercise will inform planned qualitative work to explore patients' experiences of living with and beyond cancer with comorbid illness. Including patient partners in the research prioritisation process adds focus and relevance, and feeds into future work and recommendations to improve health and social care for this group of patients. Reflections on the consultation process contribute to a broadening of understanding the field of patient involvement.

Diversity and Inclusion in Unregulated mHealth Research: Addressing the Risks

mHealth devices and applications, with their wide accessibility and ease of use, have the potential to address persistent inequities in biomedical research participation. Yet, while mHealth technologies may facilitate more inclusive research participation, negative features of some unregulated use in research - misleading enrollment practices, the promotion of secondary mHealth applications, discriminatory profiling, and poorer quality feedback due to dependencies on biased data and algorithms - may threaten the trust and engagement of underrepresented individuals and communities. To maximize the participation of currently disenfranchised groups, those involved in unregulated mHealth research must become aware of potential risks, adopt targeted education policies, audit algorithms for hidden biases, and engage citizen scientists and other community members to identify and forestall possible harms.

Unregulated Health Research Using Mobile Devices: Ethical Considerations and Policy Recommendations

Mobile devices with health apps, direct-to-consumer genetic testing, crowd-sourced information, and other data sources have enabled research by new classes of researchers. Independent researchers, citizen scientists, patient-directed researchers, self-experimenters, and others are not covered by federal research regulations because they are not recipients of federal financial assistance or conducting research in anticipation of a submission to the FDA for approval of a new drug or medical device. This article addresses the difficult policy challenge of promoting the welfare and interests of research participants, as well as the public, in the absence of regulatory requirements and without discouraging independent, innovative scientific inquiry. The article recommends a series of measures, including education, consultation, transparency, self-governance, and regulation to strike the appropriate balance.

Protecting Participants in Genomic Research: Understanding the "Web of Protections" Afforded by Federal and State Law

Researchers now commonly collect biospecimens for genomic analysis together with information from mobile devices and electronic health records. This rich combination of data creates new opportunities for understanding and addressing important health issues, but also intensifies challenges to privacy and confidentiality. Here, we elucidate the "web" of legal protections for precision medicine research by integrating findings from qualitative interviews with structured legal research and applying them to realistic research scenarios involving various privacy threats.

Donors, authors, and owners: how is genomic citizen science addressing interests in research outputs?

BACKGROUND

Citizen science is increasingly prevalent in the biomedical sciences, including the field of human genomics. Genomic citizen science initiatives present new opportunities to engage individuals in scientific discovery, but they also are provoking new questions regarding who owns the outputs of the research, including intangible ideas and discoveries and tangible writings, tools, technologies, and products. The legal and ethical claims of participants to research outputs become stronger-and also more likely to conflict with those of institution-based researchers and other stakeholders-as participants become more involved, quantitatively and qualitatively, in the research process. It is not yet known, however, how genomic citizen science initiatives are managing the interests of their participants in accessing and controlling research outputs in practice. To help fill this gap, we conducted an in-depth review of relevant policies and practices of U.S.-based genomic citizen science initiatives.

METHODS

We queried the peer-reviewed literature and grey literature to identify 22 genomic citizen science initiatives that satisfied six inclusion criteria. A data collection form was used to capture initiative features, policies, and practices relevant to participants' access to and control over research outputs.

RESULTS

This analysis revealed that the genomic citizen science landscape is diverse and includes many initiatives that do not have institutional affiliations. Two trends that are in apparent tension were identified: commercialization and operationalization of a philosophy of openness. While most initiatives supported participants' access to research outputs, including datasets and published findings, none supported participants' control over results via intellectual property, licensing, or commercialization rights. However, several initiatives disclaimed their own rights to profit from outputs.

CONCLUSIONS

There are opportunities for citizen science initiatives to incorporate more features that support participants' access to and control over research outputs, consistent with their specific objectives, operations, and technical capabilities.

Citizen Health Science: Foundations of a New Data Science Arena

Citizen scientists with health interests have rapidly increased efforts to conduct their own health studies on themselves and in their communities, giving rise to a new transdisciplinary field of citizen health science. This science leverages long-standing traditions of single case or N-of-1 studies in psychology and also finds influential roots in the history of self-experimentation in health and medicine. These studies frequently incorporate new digital tools such as smartphone tracking and many other mobile health or "mHealth" devices. Citizen health scientists also tend to operate in social networks of people working to maintain or improve their health, increasing the complexity and richness of opportunities tied to this new platform. Population data scientists are well-positioned to seek new ways to derive scientific inferences from data generated in citizen health science projects. This paper provides an overview of citizen health science for population data scientists, including basic definitions, historical foundations, current challenges and opportunities, and future directions.

Meeting the needs of underserved populations: setting the agenda for more inclusive citizen science of medicine

In its expansion to genomic, epidemiological and biomedical research, citizen science has been promoted as contributing to the democratisation of medical research and healthcare. At the same time, it has been criticised for reinforcing patterns of exclusion in health and biomedicine, and sometimes even creating new ones. Although citizen science has the potential to make biomedical research more inclusive, the benefits of current citizen science initiatives are not equally accessible for all people-in particular those who are resource-poor, located outside of traditional networks of healthcare services, or members of minorities and marginalised groups. In view of growing public investments in participatory research endeavours, we argue that it should be considered more explicitly if, and how, citizen science could help make research more inclusive, contribute to the public good, and possibly even lead to better and more equitable healthcare. Reflecting on emerging ethical concerns for scientific conduct and best medical practice, we propose a set of relevant considerations for researchers, practitioners, bioethicists, funders and participants who seek to advance ethical practices of citizen-led health initiatives, and address profound differences in position, privilege and power in research.

Neuro-Advancements and the Role of Nurses as Stated in Academic Literature and Canadian Newspapers

Neurosciences and neurotechnologies (from now on called neuro-advancements) constantly evolve and influence all facets of society. Neuroethics and neuro-governance discourses focus on the impact of neuro-advancements on individuals and society, and stakeholder involvement is identified as an important aspect of being able to deal with such an impact. Nurses engage with neuro-advancements within their occupation, including neuro-linked assistive technologies, such as brain-computer interfaces, cochlear implants, and virtual reality. The role of nurses is multifaceted and includes being providers of clinical and other health services, educators, advocates for their field and their clients, including disabled people, researchers, and influencers of policy discourses. Nurses have a stake in how neuro-advancements are governed, therefore, being influencers of neuroethics and neuro-governance discourses should be one of these roles. Lifelong learning and professional development could be one mechanism to increase the knowledge of nurses about ethical, social, and legal issues linked to neuro-advancements, which in turn, would allow nurses to provide meaningful input towards neuro-advancement discussions. Disabled people are often the recipients of neuro-advancements and are clients of nurses, therefore, they have a stake in the way nurses interact with neuro-advancements and influence the sociotechnical context of neuro-advancements, which include neuro-linked assistive devices. We performed a scoping review to investigate the role of narrative around nurses in relation to neuro-advancements within academic literature and newspapers. We found minimal engagement with the role of nurses outside of clinical services. No article raised the issue of nurses having to be involved in neuro-ethics and neuro-governance discussions or how lifelong learning could be used to gain that competency. Few articles used the term assistive technology or assistive device and no article covered the engagement of nurses with disabled people within a socio-technical context. We submit that the role narrative falls short of what is expected from nurses and shows shortcomings at the intersection of nurses, socio-technical approaches to neuro-assistive technologies and other neuro-advancements and people with disabilities. Neuro-governance and neuroethic discourses could be a useful way for nurses and disabled people to co-shape the socio-technical context of neuro-advancements, including neuro-assistive technologies. Lifelong learning initiatives should be put in place to provide the knowledge necessary for nurses to take part in the neuroethics and neuro-governance discussion.

The Rise of Citizen Science in Health and Biomedical Research

Citizen science models of public participation in scientific research represent a growing area of opportunity for health and biomedical research, as well as new impetus for more collaborative forms of engagement in large-scale research. However, this also surfaces a variety of ethical issues that both fall outside of and build upon the standard human subjects concerns in bioethics. This article provides background on citizen science, examples of current projects in the field, and discussion of established and emerging ethical issues for citizen science in health and biomedical research.

Mind the gap: resources required to receive, process and interpret research-returned whole genome data

Most genotype-phenotype studies have historically lacked population diversity, impacting the generalizability of findings and thereby limiting the ability to equitably implement precision medicine. This well-documented problem has generated much interest in the ascertainment of new cohorts with an emphasis on multiple dimensions of diversity, including race/ethnicity, gender, age, socioeconomic status, disability, and geography. The most well known of these new cohort efforts is arguably All of Us, formerly known as the Precision Medicine Cohort Initiative Program. All of Us intends to ascertain at least one million participants in the United States representative of the multiple dimensions of diversity. As an incentive to participate, All of Us is offering the return of research results, including whole genome sequencing data, as well as the opportunity to contribute to the scientific process as non-scientists. The scale and scope of the proposed return of research results are unprecedented. Here, we briefly review possible return of genetic data models, including the likely data file formats and modes of data transfer or access. We also review the resources required to access and interpret the genetic or genomic data once received by the average participant, highlighting the nuanced anticipated barriers that will challenge both the digitally, computationally literate and illiterate participant alike. This inventory of resources required to receive, process, and interpret return of research results exposes the potential for access disparities and warns the scientific community to mind the gap so that all participants have equal access and understanding of the benefits of human genetic research.

Native American Youth Citizen Scientists Uncovering Community Health and Food Security Priorities

Citizen science based on principles of community-based participatory research involves the co-creation of research among citizens and professional researchers in substantive aspects of scientific inquiry including equitable contributions to governance, research questions, data collection, analysis, application of findings, and dissemination. This article reports on a citizen science project conducted by 12 youth in the Karuk Tribe collaborating with university scientists. The youth participated in a research leadership development program conducted in their community located in rural/remote northern California. The youth led a community health and food security assessment survey using a mobile application tool (n = 212). They uncovered community concerns about the health of residents and healthfulness of food choices in schools, as well as a significant difference related to confidence in making healthy food choices between those who are and are not physically active. The Tribe applied the study findings with youth in alignment with cultural values and practices investing in developing community gardens, improving school food quality, and promoting native food practices that incorporate physical activities such as hiking, gathering, and preserving food. This study offers lessons for research collaborations among citizen scientists from communities underrepresented in health research and university scientists.

From Crowdsourcing to Extreme Citizen Science: Participatory Research for Environmental Health

Environmental health issues are becoming more challenging, and addressing them requires new approaches to research design and decision-making processes. Participatory research approaches, in which researchers and communities are involved in all aspects of a research study, can improve study outcomes and foster greater data accessibility and utility as well as increase public transparency. Here we review varied concepts of participatory research, describe how it complements and overlaps with community engagement and environmental justice, examine its intersection with emerging environmental sensor technologies, and discuss the strengths and limitations of participatory research. Although participatory research includes methodological challenges, such as biases in data collection and data quality, it has been found to increase the relevance of research questions, result in better knowledge production, and impact health policies. Improved research partnerships among government agencies, academia, and communities can increase scientific rigor, build community capacity, and produce sustainable outcomes.

Questioning the rhetoric of a 'willing population' in Finnish biobanking

According to surveys and opinion polls, citizens in Nordic welfare societies have positive, supportive attitudes towards medical research and biobanking. In Finland, it was expected that this would result in the active biobank participation of patients and citizens. Indeed, public support has been rhetorically utilised as a unique societal factor and advantage in the promotion of Finnish biobanks, underlining the potential Finland offers for the international biomedical enterprise. In this paper, we critically analyse the use of notions such as 'willing population' and 'engaged people' in the promotion and legitimation of biobanking. First, there is a seeming contradiction between positive attitudes and actual participation rates, as biobanks have faced unexpected challenges in participant recruitment during the first years of their operations. As a result, the concept of a willing population was redirected to problematise the necessity of informed consent. Second, we question whether it is even meaningful to assume the existence of an informed and engaged population with regard to biobanking. Therefore, we suggest that it is problematic to talk about a willing population at the same time as the relevance of the informed consent system is being questioned by biobank actors and policy makers. We analyse this tension in relation to existing data on Finnish people's attitudes, pointing out that positive, supportive views do not directly transform into high participation rates; nor do they justify the claims of policy makers and biobank proponents that people are willing to participate, when in fact surveys report that people know very little about biobanks.

Taking patient involvement seriously: a critical ethical analysis of participatory approaches in data-intensive medical research

BACKGROUND

Data-intensive research in medicine and healthcare such as health-related big data research (HBDR) implies that data from clinical routine, research and patient-reported data, but also non-medical social or demographic data, are aggregated and linked in order to optimize biomedical research. In this context, notions of patient participation and involvement are frequently invoked to legitimize this kind of research and improve its governance. The aim of this debate paper is to critically examine the specific use and ethical role of participatory concepts in the context of HBDR and data-intensive research in medicine and healthcare.

DISCUSSION

We introduce basic conceptual distinctions for the understanding of participation by looking at relevant fields of application in politics, bioethics and medical research. Against this backdrop, we identify three paradigmatic participatory roles that patients/subjects are assigned within the field of HBDR: participants as providers of biomaterials and data, participants as administrators of their own research participation and participants as (co-)principal investigators. We further illustrate these roles by exemplary data-intensive research-initiatives. Our analysis of these initiatives and their respective participatory promises reveals specific ethical and practical shortcomings and challenges. Central problems affecting, amongst others, ethical and methodological research standards, as well as public trust in research, result from the negligence of essential political-ethical dimensions of genuine participation.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the conceptual distinctions introduced, we formulate basic criteria for justified appeals to participatory approaches in HBDR and data-intensive research in medicine and healthcare in order to overcome these shortcomings. As we suggest, this is not only a matter of conceptual clarity, but a crucial requirement for maintaining ethical standards and trust in HBDR and related medical research.