SERIES:eHealth in primary care. Part 2: Exploring the ethical implications of its application in primary care practice

Background: eHealth promises to increase self-management and personalised medicine and improve cost-effectiveness in primary care. Paired with these promises are ethical implications, as eHealth will affect patients' and primary care professionals' (PCPs) experiences, values, norms, and relationships.Objectives: We argue what ethical implications related to the impact of eHealth on four vital aspects of primary care could (and should) be anticipated.Discussion: (1) EHealth influences dealing with predictive and diagnostic uncertainty. Machine-learning based clinical decision support systems offer (seemingly) objective, quantified, and personalised outcomes. However, they also introduce new loci of uncertainty and subjectivity. The decision-making process becomes opaque, and algorithms can be invalid, biased, or even discriminatory. This has implications for professional responsibilities and judgments, justice, autonomy, and trust. (2) EHealth affects the roles and responsibilities of patients because it can stimulate self-management and autonomy. However, autonomy can also be compromised, e.g. in cases of persuasive technologies and eHealth can increase existing health disparities. (3) The delegation of tasks to a network of technologies and stakeholders requires attention for responsibility gaps and new responsibilities. (4) The triangulate relationship: patient-eHealth-PCP requires a reconsideration of the role of human interaction and 'humanness' in primary care as well as of shaping Shared Decision Making.Conclusion: Our analysis is an essential first step towards setting up a dedicated ethics research agenda that should be examined in parallel to the development and implementation of eHealth. The ultimate goal is to inspire the development of practice-specific ethical recommendations

Item Development and Face Validity of the Rheumatoid Arthritis Patient Priorities in Pharmacological Interventions Outcome Measures

© 2015, Springer International Publishing Switzerland. Background: The assessment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is dominated by core sets and indices that have been developed by RA professionals. Previous research developed a set of eight priority treatment outcomes generated by patients to complement the professionally developed core sets for RA. Objective: This study aimed to facilitate quantitative measurement of these outcomes. Methods: Two consultation meetings with patient research partners diagnosed with RA (n=18) were held to identify face validity in existing instruments (Phase 1) at the Bristol Royal Infirmary. Where validated measures did not exist, new numerical rating scales (NRS) were constructed and discussed at two focus groups with patients diagnosed with RA (n=8) at the Bristol Royal Infirmary and the Royal National Hospital for Rheumatic Diseases (Phase 2). Feedback on the stem question, time frame, anchors and layout was recorded and transcribed verbatim. Results: Of the eight priorities, existing NRS for pain, activities of daily living and fatigue were voted as acceptable (Phase 1), but new NRS were required for five priorities. The partners strongly recommended that the three separate domains of severity, effect and ability to cope in each measurement area be assessed, as in the existing validated fatigue NRS. Focus group participants (Phase 2) made significant contributions to the phrasing of questions, for example how to ensure ‘mobility’ could be uniformly understood and how changes in valued activities be judged appropriately. Conclusion: Through extensive patient feedback, 24 NRS were constructed based on priorities identified by patients and encompassing domains where existing questionnaires contain many more items and do not address three important concepts endorsed by patients: severity, effect and coping. The Rheumatoid Arthritis Patient Priorities in Pharmacological Interventions patient-reported outcome measures are now ready for the evaluation of comprehension, construct validity and sensitivity through an observational study

Recommendations for a core outcome set for measuring standing balance in adult populations: a consensus-based approach

Standing balance is imperative for mobility and avoiding falls. Use of an excessive number of standing balance measures has limited the synthesis of balance intervention data and hampered consistent clinical practice.To develop recommendations for a core outcome set (COS) of standing balance measures for research and practice among adults.A combination of scoping reviews, literature appraisal, anonymous voting and face-to-face meetings with fourteen invited experts from a range of disciplines with international recognition in balance measurement and falls prevention. Consensus was sought over three rounds using pre-established criteria.The scoping review identified 56 existing standing balance measures validated in adult populations with evidence of use in the past five years, and these were considered for inclusion in the COS.Fifteen measures were excluded after the first round of scoring and a further 36 after round two. Five measures were considered in round three. Two measures reached consensus for recommendation, and the expert panel recommended that at a minimum, either the Berg Balance Scale or Mini Balance Evaluation Systems Test be used when measuring standing balance in adult populations.Inclusion of two measures in the COS may increase the feasibility of potential uptake, but poses challenges for data synthesis. Adoption of the standing balance COS does not constitute a comprehensive balance assessment for any population, and users should include additional validated measures as appropriate.The absence of a gold standard for measuring standing balance has contributed to the proliferation of outcome measures. These recommendations represent an important first step towards greater standardization in the assessment and measurement of this critical skill and will inform clinical research and practice internationally

European recommendations integrating genetic testing into multidisciplinary management of sudden cardiac death.

Sudden cardiac death (SCD) accounts for 10-20% of total mortality, i.e., one in five individuals will eventually die suddenly. Given the substantial genetic component of SCD in younger cases, postmortem genetic testing may be particularly useful in elucidating etiological factors in the cause of death in this subset. The identification of genes responsible for inherited cardiac diseases have led to the organization of cardiogenetic consultations in many countries worldwide. Expert recommendations are available, emphasizing the importance of genetic testing and appropriate information provision of affected individuals, as well as their relatives. However, the context of postmortem genetic testing raises some particular ethical, legal, and practical (including economic or financial) challenges. The Public and Professional Policy Committee of the European Society of Human Genetics (ESHG), together with international experts, developed recommendations on management of SCD after a workshop sponsored by the Brocher Foundation and ESHG in November 2016. These recommendations have been endorsed by the ESHG Board, the European Council of Legal Medicine, the European Society of Cardiology working group on myocardial and pericardial diseases, the ERN GUARD-HEART, and the Association for European Cardiovascular Pathology. They emphasize the importance of increasing the proportion of both medical and medicolegal autopsies and educating the professionals. Multidisciplinary collaboration is of utmost importance. Public funding should be allocated to reach these goals and allow public health evaluation

CNV-association meta-analysis in 191,161 European adults reveals new loci associated with anthropometric traits

Funding Information: This research has been conducted using the UK Biobank Resource. This research has been conducted using the Danish National Biobank resource. The authors are grateful to the Raine Study participants and their families, and to the Raine Study research staff for cohort co-ordination and data collection. QIMR is grateful to the twins and their families for their generous participation in these studies. We would like to thank staff at the Queensland Institute of Medical Research: Anjali Henders, Dixie Statham, Lisa Bowdler, Ann Eldridge, and Marlene Grace for sample collection, processing and genotyping, Scott Gordon, Brian McEvoy, Belinda Cornes and Beben Benyamin for data QC and preparation, and David Smyth and Harry Beeby for IT support. HBCS Acknowledgements: We thank all study participants as well as everybody involved in the Helsinki Birth Cohort Study. Helsinki Birth Cohort Study has been supported by grants from the Academy of Finland, the Finnish Diabetes Research Society, Folkhälsan Research Foundation, Novo Nordisk Foundation, Finska Läkaresällskapet, Juho Vainio Foundation, Signe and Ane Gyllenberg Foundation, University of Helsinki, Ministry of Education, Ahokas Foundation, Emil Aaltonen Foundation. Finrisk study is grateful for the THL DNA laboratory for its skillful work to produce the DNA samples used in this study and thanks the Sanger Institute and FIMM genotyping facilities for genotyping the samples. We thank the MOLGENIS team and Genomics Coordination Center of the University Medical Center Groningen for software development and data management, in particular Marieke Bijlsma and Edith Adriaanse. This work was supported by the Leenards Foundation (to Z.K.), the Swiss National Science Foundation (31003A_169929 to Z.K., Sinergia grant CRSII33-133044 to AR), Simons Foundation (SFARI274424 to AR) and SystemsX.ch (51RTP0_151019 to Z.K.). A.R.W., H.Y. and T.M.F. are supported by the European Research Council grant: 323195:SZ-245. M.A.T., M.N.W. and An.M. are supported by the Wellcome Trust Institutional Strategic Support Award (WT097835MF). For full funding information of all participating cohorts see Supplementary Note 2. Publisher Copyright: © 2017 The Author(s).There are few examples of robust associations between rare copy number variants (CNVs) and complex continuous human traits. Here we present a large-scale CNV association meta-analysis on anthropometric traits in up to 191,161 adult samples from 26 cohorts. The study reveals five CNV associations at 1q21.1, 3q29, 7q11.23, 11p14.2, and 18q21.32 and confirms two known loci at 16p11.2 and 22q11.21, implicating at least one anthropometric trait. The discovered CNVs are recurrent and rare (0.01-0.2%), with large effects on height (> 2.4 cm), weight ( 5 kg), and body mass index (BMI) (> 3.5 kg/m(2)). Burden analysis shows a 0.41 cm decrease in height, a 0.003 increase in waist-to-hip ratio and increase in BMI by 0.14 kg/m2 for each Mb of total deletion burden (P = 2.5 x 10(-10), 6.0 x 10(-5), and 2.9 x 10(-3)). Our study provides evidence that the same genes (e.g., MC4R, FIBIN, and FMO5) harbor both common and rare variants affecting body size and that anthropometric traits share genetic loci with developmental and psychiatric disorders.Peer reviewe

Consent for governance in the ethical use of organoids comment

Current advances in biotechnology open up unprecedented possibilities to transform human tissues into complex, valuable tissue products, such as organoids. Here, we propose consent for governance as a leading paradigm for the derivation, storage and use of complex human tissue products to ensure adjustment to changing ethical requirements

Organoids as hybrids : Ethical implications for the exchange of human tissues

Recent developments in biotechnology allow for the generation of increasingly complex products out of human tissues, for example, human stem cell lines, synthetic embryo-like structures and organoids. These developments are coupled with growing commercial interests. Although commercialisation can spark the scientific and clinical promises, profit-making out of human tissues is ethically contentious and known to raise public concern. The traditional bioethical frames of gift versus market are inapt to capture the resulting practical and ethical complexities. Therefore, we propose an alternative approach to identify, evaluate and deal with the ethical challenges that are raised by the increasing commercialisation of the exchange of sophisticated human tissue products. We use organoid technology, a cutting-edge stem cell technology that enables the cultivation of 'mini-organs' in a dish, as an example. First, we examine the moral value of organoids and recognise them as hybrids that relate to persons and their bodies as well as to technologies and markets in ambiguous ways. Second, we show that commercialisation of organoids is legitimised by a detachment of the instrumental and commercial value of organoids from their associations with persons and their bodies. This detachment is enacted in steps of disentanglement, among which consent and commodification. Third, we contend that far-reaching disentanglement is ethically challenging: (1) Societal interests could be put under pressure, because the rationale for commercialising organoid technology, that is, to stimulate biomedical innovation for the good of society, may not be fulfilled; (2) The interests of donors are made subordinate to those of third parties and the relational moral value of organoids may be insufficiently recognised. Fourth, we propose a 'consent for governance' model that contributes to responsible innovation and clinical translation in this exciting field