The advancement of artificial intelligence in biomedical research and health innovation: challenges and opportunities in emerging economies

The advancement of artificial intelligence (AI), algorithm optimization and high-throughput experiments has enabled scientists to accelerate the discovery of new chemicals and materials with unprecedented efficiency, resilience and precision. Over the recent years, the so-called autonomous experimentation (AE) systems are featured as key AI innovation to enhance and accelerate research and development (R&D). Also known as self-driving laboratories or materials acceleration platforms, AE systems are digital platforms capable of running a large number of experiments autonomously. Those systems are rapidly impacting biomedical research and clinical innovation, in areas such as drug discovery, nanomedicine, precision oncology, and others. As it is expected that AE will impact healthcare innovation from local to global levels, its implications for science and technology in emerging economies should be examined. By examining the increasing relevance of AE in contemporary R&D activities, this article aims to explore the advancement of artificial intelligence in biomedical research and health innovation, highlighting its implications, challenges and opportunities in emerging economies. AE presents an opportunity for stakeholders from emerging economies to co-produce the global knowledge landscape of AI in health. However, asymmetries in R&D capabilities should be acknowledged since emerging economies suffers from inadequacies and discontinuities in resources and funding. The establishment of decentralized AE infrastructures could support stakeholders to overcome local restrictions and opens venues for more culturally diverse, equitable, and trustworthy development of AI in health-related R&D through meaningful partnerships and engagement. Collaborations with innovators from emerging economies could facilitate anticipation of fiscal pressures in science and technology policies, obsolescence of knowledge infrastructures, ethical and regulatory policy lag, and other issues present in the Global South. Also, improving cultural and geographical representativeness of AE contributes to foster the diffusion and acceptance of AI in health-related R&D worldwide. Institutional preparedness is critical and could enable stakeholders to navigate opportunities of AI in biomedical research and health innovation in the coming years.

How Do Molecular Systems Engineering Scientists Frame the Ethics of Their Research?

BACKGROUND

There are intense discussions about the ethical and societal implications of biomedical engineering, but little data to suggest how scientists think about the ethics of their work. The aim of this study is to describe how scientists frame the ethics of their research, with a focus on the field of molecular systems engineering.

METHODS

Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted during 2021-2022, as part of a larger study. This analysis includes a broad question about how participants view ethics as related to their work, with follow up probes about the topics they consider most important. Interviews were transcribed, inductively coded by two researchers to consensus, and analyzed thematically.

RESULTS

Twenty-four scientists participated in the study. Interviewees hold positions as professors, principal investigators, and senior staff researchers in universities or research institutes in the United States and Europe. Among those scientists who reported reflecting on ethical considerations in their work, many equated ethics with research ethics topics (e.g., safety, replicability), or with regulation and guidelines. Participants expressed the view that ethical issues are primarily relevant for clinical trials of bioengineered products, or for those working with animal or human subjects. Scientists described their research as "too early" or "not examining anything living" with regard to ethical reflection. Finally, many felt that ethics is seen as territory for experts and therefore beyond scientists' competencies.

CONCLUSIONS

Molecular systems engineering scientists currently focus on regulatory aspects as the framework for their ethical analyses. They describe using a framework to define when life arises, as a means to determine when further ethical engagement is warranted. Further research is needed to investigate how scientists relate to the ethics of their scientific work, and build consensus around concepts of life, autonomous behavior, and physiological relevance of bioengineered systems.

From lab to society: Fostering clinical translation of molecular systems engineering

Over the last decade, bioengineering has seen a sustained growth in scientific publications, patents, and clinical trials. As the field attempts to bridge the gap between discovery and clinical application, a broader societal dialogue is needed to build public trust and address potential ethical, societal, and regulatory challenges. In this essay, we discuss societal aspects linked to the clinical use of biomedical engineering approaches and technologies, with a specific focus on molecular systems engineering. Drawing on data from interviews with 24 scientists, we identified four key aspects for fostering societal support for translational efforts in this domain: (1) effective science communication and internal awareness; (2) open societal dialogue; (3) fair and equitable access to new technologies; and (4) adequate science and technology policies. We conclude that molecular systems engineering would benefit from anticipating future challenges with the view of building a robust bond of trust with lay publics, regulators, and society at large.

Long Covid requires a global response centred on equity and dialogue

Long Covid, or Post-Covid Conditions, is a global health problem. Yet we know strikingly little about the different experiences of Long Covid patients cross-nationally. To address this shortcoming, we conducted an online survey of Long Covid patients active on social media in the U.S. (n = 334, October to December 2021) and Brazil (n = 144, January to April 2022). Our analysis of short answer responses indicates patient dissatisfaction with medical care provided for Long Covid in both the U.S. and Brazil. For Long Covid patients in Brazil, there were additional concerns raised about the lack of local expertise about their condition. Based on these results, we urge policymakers to expand the education of medical professionals in order to raise awareness of Long Covid. Experts in the Global North should also be encouraged to engage in dialogue with patient groups and experts in the Global South, in order to better understand how local contexts shape the experience of Long Covid.

Organ chip research in Europe: players, initiatives, and policies

Background: Organ chips are microfabricated devices containing living engineered organ substructures in a controlled microenvironment. Research on organ chips has increased considerably over the past two decades. Aim: This paper offers an overview of the emerging knowledge ecosystem of organ chip research in Europe. Method: This study is based on queries and analyses undertaken through the bibliometric software Dimensions.ai. Results: Organ chip research has been rapidly growing in Europe in recent years, supported by robust academic science consortia, public-private initiatives, dedicated funding, and science policy instruments. Our data shows that previous investment in basic and fundamental research in centers of excellence in bioengineering science and technology are relevant to future investment in organ chips. Moreover, organ chip research in Europe is characterized by collaborative infrastructures to promote convergence of scientific, technical, and clinical capabilities. Conclusion: According to our study, the knowledge ecosystem of organ chip research in Europe has been growing sustainably. This growth is due to relevant institutional diversity, public-private initiatives, and ongoing research collaborations supported by robust funding schemes.

Rethinking approaches of science, technology, and innovation in healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic: the challenge of translating knowledge infrastructures to public needs

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak made it clear that despite the potential of science, technology, and innovation (ST&I) to positively impact healthcare systems worldwide, as shown by the rapid development of SARS-CoV-2 test diagnostics and new mRNA vaccines, healthcare stakeholders have faced significant challenges in responding to the crisis through well-integrated ST&I-oriented health initiatives and policies. Therefore, the pandemic has mobilized experts, industry, and governments to evaluate alternative trajectories to promote a more efficient dialogue between ST&I and public health. This article presents a critical thinking about the contemporary asymmetries in the technical and political infrastructures available for particular approaches in ST&I in health, such as precision medicine, and for public health systems worldwide, uncovering a persistent gap in the translation of knowledge and technologies to adequately coordinated responses to the pandemic. We stimulate the understanding of this process as a matter of translation between platforms of knowledge and policy rationales shaped by different institutionalized frames of organizational practices and agendas. We draw attention to the need to strengthen governance tools for the promotion of ST&I as a strategic component of the post-pandemic agenda in public health, to prepare societies to respond efficiently to future emergencies.

The Institutional Building of Science and Innovation Diplomacy in Latin America: Toward a Comprehensive Analytical Typology

Science and Innovation Diplomacy (S&ID) has emerged in recent years as a relevant scholarly movement and interdisciplinary research agenda internationally. This field is promoting a significant impact on the understanding of the cultural and political dynamics of Science, Technology and Innovation (ST&I), implementing initiatives from local to global level. Notwithstanding, S&ID is growing asymmetrically around the world, setting up over a particular configuration in the so-called Global South (GS) societies. In Latin America (LA), although S&ID is a recent, unequal and intra-nationally fragmented process, there are important achievements that have been able to create a favorable mix of approaches, agendas, and practices in this field. Addressing the scope of the special issue “Science Diplomacy and Sustainable Development: Perspectives from Latin America,” this article aims to present a comprehensive analytical typology to the study of the emerging experiences of S&ID in LA, catching the diversity of this research agenda. This is a qualitative merged method-based study, sustained by a literature review, documentary research, online data analysis, and typology building. We understand S&ID in LA as a tentative re-organization of different states and subnational actors around the study and institutionalization of the governance of contemporary transformations on the systems of ST&I.

Como a comunidade internacional da medicina de precisão tem se posicionado diante dos desafios impostos pela pandemia da COVID-19?

Medicina de precisão pode ser definida como um movimento de transformação da biomedicina contemporânea que orienta a atividade de pesquisa acadêmica, modelos de negócios e o desenvolvimento de produtos e serviços de saúde desenhados individualmente para o usuário, baseado em informações genéticas e outros marcadores biomédicos dos pacientes. Ao longo dos últimos anos, essa comunidade tem sido bastante atuante no cenário científico internacional. No entanto, durante a pandemia da COVID-19 ainda não ficou claro quais posicionamentos ou estratégias têm sido adotadas por esses grupos para o enfrentamento da crise sanitária. O objetivo deste artigo é compreender como a comunidade internacional da medicina de precisão está reagindo à pandemia da COVID-19, e em que estão baseadas as suas abordagens e potenciais soluções sugeridas para a mitigação dos efeitos negativos causados pelo aumento das infecções pelo novo coronavírus. Para tanto, foi feita pesquisa documental em 28 documentos provenientes de 18 fontes selecionadas, em que analisou-se as narrativas difundidas pelos profissionais da medicina de precisão em artigos científicos, editoriais, comentários, perspectivas, notícias de jornais e boletins e conferência virtual da Coalizão de Medicina Personalizada (PMC, em inglês). Com isso, buscou-se compreender como esses grupos imaginam uma nova configuração sociotécnica para o enfrentamento da pandemia e de seus efeitos.