Search

As AI deployment has broadened, so too has an awareness for the ethical implications and problems that may ensue from this deployment. In response, groups across multiple domains have issued AI ethics standards that rely on vague, high-level principles to find consensus. One such high-level principle that is common across the AI landscape is ‘human-centredness’, though oftentimes it is applied without due investigation into its merits and limitations and without a clear, common definition. This paper undertakes a scoping review of AI ethics standards to examine the commitment to ‘human-centredness’ and how this commitment interacts with other ethical concerns, namely, concerns for nonhumans animals and environmental wellbeing. We found that human-centred AI ethics standards tend to prioritise humans over nonhumans more so than nonhuman-centred standards. A critical analysis of our findings suggests that a commitment to human-centredness within AI ethics standards accords with the definition of anthropocentrism in moral philosophy: that humans have, at least, more intrinsic moral value than nonhumans. We consider some of the limitations of anthropocentric AI ethics, which include permitting harm to the environment and animals and undermining the stability of ecosystems.

Abstract Open and practical exchange, dissemination, and reuse of specimens and data have become a fundamental requirement for life sciences research. The quality of the data obtained and thus the findings and knowledge derived is thus significantly influenced by the quality of the samples, the experimental methods, and the data analysis. Therefore, a comprehensive and precise documentation of the pre‐analytical conditions, the analytical procedures, and the data processing are essential to be able to assess the validity of the research results. With the increasing importance of the exchange, reuse, and sharing of data and samples, procedures are required that enable cross‐organizational documentation, traceability, and non‐repudiation. At present, this information on the provenance of samples and data is mostly either sparse, incomplete, or incoherent. Since there is no uniform framework, this information is usually only provided within the organization and not interoperably. At the same time, the collection and sharing of biological and environmental specimens increasingly require definition and documentation of benefit sharing and compliance to regulatory requirements rather than consideration of pure scientific needs. In this publication, we present an ongoing standardization effort to provide trustworthy machine‐actionable documentation of the data lineage and specimens. We would like to invite experts from the biotechnology and biomedical fields to further contribute to the standard.

Background: A more comprehensive understanding and measurement of adult social care need could contribute to efforts to develop more effective, holistic personalised care, particularly for those with multiple long-term conditions (MLTC). Progress in this area faces the challenge of a lack of clarity in the literature relating to how social care need is assessed and coded within variables included in primary care databases. Aim: To explore how social care need is assessed and coded within variables included in primary care databases. Design & setting: An exploratory rapid scoping review of peer-reviewed articles and grey literature. Method: Articles were screened and extracted onto a charting sheet and findings were summarised descriptively. Articles were included if published in English and related to primary and social care using data from national primary care databases. Results: The search yielded 4010 articles. Twenty-seven were included. Six articles used the term ‘social care need’, although related terminology was identified including ‘need factors’, ‘social support’, and ‘social care support’. Articles mainly focused on specific components of social care need, including levels of social care usage or service utilisation and costs incurred to social care, primary care, and other providers in addressing needs. A limited range of database variables were found measuring social care need. Conclusion: Further research is needed on how social care need has been defined in a UK context and captured in primary care big databases. There is potential scope to broaden the definition of social care need, which captures social service needs and wider social needs.

BackgroundMultiple long-term health conditions (multimorbidity) (MLTC-M) are increasingly prevalent and associated with high rates of morbidity, mortality, and health care expenditure. Strategies to address this have primarily focused on the biological aspects of disease, but MLTC-M also result from and are associated with additional psychosocial, economic, and environmental barriers. A shift toward more personalized, holistic, and integrated care could be effective. This could be made more efficient by identifying groups of populations based on their health and social needs. In turn, these will contribute to evidence-based solutions supporting delivery of interventions tailored to address the needs pertinent to each cluster. Evidence is needed on how to generate clusters based on health and social needs and quantify the impact of clusters on long-term health and costs. ObjectiveWe intend to develop and validate population clusters that consider determinants of health and social care needs for people with MLTC-M using data-driven machine learning (ML) methods compared to expert-driven approaches within primary care national databases, followed by evaluation of cluster trajectories and their association with health outcomes and costs. MethodsThe mixed methods program of work with parallel work streams include the following: (1) qualitative semistructured interview studies exploring patient, caregiver, and professional views on clinical and socioeconomic factors influencing experiences of living with or seeking care in MLTC-M; (2) modified Delphi with relevant stakeholders to generate variables on health and social (wider) determinants and to examine the feasibility of including these variables within existing primary care databases; and (3) cohort study with expert-driven segmentation, alongside data-driven algorithms. Outputs will be compared, clusters characterized, and trajectories over time examined to quantify associations with mortality, additional long-term conditions, worsening frailty, disease severity, and 10-year health and social care costs. ResultsThe study will commence in October 2021 and is expected to be completed by October 2023. ConclusionsBy studying MLTC-M clusters, we will assess how more personalized care can be developed, how accurate costs can be provided, and how to better understand the personal and medical profiles and environment of individuals within each cluster. Integrated care that considers “whole persons” and their environment is essential in addressing the complex, diverse, and individual needs of people living with MLTC-M. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)PRR1-10.2196/34405

Purpose – Ensuring quality is one of the most significant challenges in microtask crowdsourcing tasks. Aggregation of the collected data from the crowd is one of the important steps to infer the correct answer, but the existing study seems to be limited to the single-step task. This study aims to look at multiple-step classification tasks and understand aggregation in such cases; hence, it is useful for assessing the classification quality. Design/methodology/approach – The authors present a model to capture the information of the workflow, questions and answers for both single- and multiple-question classification tasks. They propose an adapted approach on top of the classic approach so that the model can handle tasks with several multiple-choice questions in general instead of a specific domain or any specific hierarchical classifications. They evaluate their approach with three representative tasks from existing citizen science projects in which they have the gold standard created by experts. Findings – The results show that the approach can provide significant improvements to the overall classification accuracy. The authors’ analysis also demonstrates that all algorithms can achieve higher accuracy for the volunteer- versus paid-generated data sets for the same task. Furthermore, the authors observed interesting patterns in the relationship between the performance of different algorithms and workflow-specific factors including the number of steps and the number of available options in each step. Originality/value – Due to the nature of crowdsourcing, aggregating the collected data is an important process to understand the quality of crowdsourcing results. Different inference algorithms have been studied for simple microtasks consisting of single questions with two or more answers. However, as classification tasks typically contain many questions, the proposed method can be applied to a wide range of tasks including both single- and multiple-question classification tasks.

Data processing agreements in health data management are laid out by organisations in monolithic “Terms and Conditions” documents written in natural legal language. These top-down policies usually protect the interest of the service providers, rather than the data owners. They are coarse-grained and do not allow for more than a few opt-in or opt-out options for individuals to express their consent on personal data processing, and these options often do not transfer to software as they were intended to. In this paper, we study the problem of health data sharing and we advocate the need for individuals to describe their personal contract of data usage in a formal, machine-processable language. We develop an application for sharing patient genomic information and test results, and use interactions with patients and clinicians in order to identify the particular peculiarities a privacy/policy/consent language should offer in this complicated domain. We present how Semantic Web technologies can have a central role in this approach by providing the formal tools and features required in such a language. We present our ongoing approach to construct an ontology-based framework and a policy language that allows patients and clinicians to express fine-grained consent, preferences or suggestions on sharing medical information. Our language offers unique features such as multi-party ownership of data or data sharing dependencies. We evaluate the landscape of policy languages from different areas, and show how they are lacking major requirements needed in health data management. In addition to enabling patients, our approach helps organisations increase technological capabilities, abide by legal requirements, and save resources.