BACKGROUND: Advancements in cancer treatment and survivorship rely on participation in research and access to health records.
METHODS: This study explored preferences for data access and sharing in 14 workshops with 42 community members, most of whom were a cancer survivor or carer. Various scenarios for data access and sharing were presented and discussed, with participants\' preferences summarized using descriptive statistics. Reasons underlying these preferences were identified through a thematic analysis of workshop transcripts.
RESULTS: Most participants indicated a willingness for researchers to use their self-report data and current health records for a specific research project (86%). Many were also willing for their self-report data and current (62%) or all future (44%) health records to be shared with other researchers for use in other studies if made aware of this. Willingness to consent to data access and sharing data in cancer research was influenced by: (i) the potential for data sharing to advance medical discoveries and benefit people impacted by cancer in the future, (ii) transparency around researchers\' credibility and their intentions for data sharing, (iii) level of ownership and control over data sharing, and (iv) protocols for privacy and confidentiality in data sharing.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on these themes, we present practical strategies for optimizing data access and sharing in cancer research.

UNASSIGNED: An objective, physiological measurement taken using a medical device may reduce the incidence of pressure ulcers through earlier detection of problems signs before visual signs appear. Research in this field is hampered by variations in clinical practice and patient-level confounders.
UNASSIGNED: The authors outline key considerations for designing a protocol for a study to assess the efficacy and safety of a prognostic medical device in reducing pressure ulcer incidence in a hospital, including comparators, randomisation, sample size, ethics and practical issues.
UNASSIGNED: Key issues relating to methodology and ethics are considered alongside a theoretical protocol, which could support future researchers in wound care trials.
UNASSIGNED: A prospective, three-armed, multi-centre, stratified cluster-randomised controlled trial is proposed. The third arm is recommended as it is expected that patients will need to be moved for the medical device to be used and repositioning is a preventive strategy. A minimum of 16 200 patients in 33 wards would needed to be recruited to achieve statistical significance. Ethical considerations in terms of consent or assent need to be considered.
UNASSIGNED: The hypothetical study designed to evaluate the effectiveness of a diagnostic or prognostic medical device in reducing pressure ulcer incidence in secondary care, while accounting for biases, would require large sample sizes and involves risks of inter-operator and inter-device reliability, heterogeneity of users and the vague clinical interpretation of device results. Robust research in this field has the potential to influence or change policy and practice relating to the prevention of pressure ulcers in secondary care.

BACKGROUND: Innovative tools leveraging artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) are rapidly being developed for medicine, with new applications emerging in prediction, diagnosis, and treatment across a range of illnesses, patient populations, and clinical procedures. One barrier for successful innovation is the scarcity of research in the current literature seeking and analyzing the views of AI or ML researchers and physicians to support ethical guidance.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to describe, using a qualitative approach, the landscape of ethical issues that AI or ML researchers and physicians with professional exposure to AI or ML tools observe or anticipate in the development and use of AI and ML in medicine.
METHODS: Semistructured interviews were used to facilitate in-depth, open-ended discussion, and a purposeful sampling technique was used to identify and recruit participants. We conducted 21 semistructured interviews with a purposeful sample of AI and ML researchers (n=10) and physicians (n=11). We asked interviewees about their views regarding ethical considerations related to the adoption of AI and ML in medicine. Interviews were transcribed and deidentified by members of our research team. Data analysis was guided by the principles of qualitative content analysis. This approach, in which transcribed data is broken down into descriptive units that are named and sorted based on their content, allows for the inductive emergence of codes directly from the data set.
RESULTS: Notably, both researchers and physicians articulated concerns regarding how AI and ML innovations are shaped in their early development (ie, the problem formulation stage). Considerations encompassed the assessment of research priorities and motivations, clarity and centeredness of clinical needs, professional and demographic diversity of research teams, and interdisciplinary knowledge generation and collaboration. Phase-1 ethical issues identified by interviewees were notably interdisciplinary in nature and invited questions regarding how to align priorities and values across disciplines and ensure clinical value throughout the development and implementation of medical AI and ML. Relatedly, interviewees suggested interdisciplinary solutions to these issues, for example, more resources to support knowledge generation and collaboration between developers and physicians, engagement with a broader range of stakeholders, and efforts to increase diversity in research broadly and within individual teams.
CONCLUSIONS: These qualitative findings help elucidate several ethical challenges anticipated or encountered in AI and ML for health care. Our study is unique in that its use of open-ended questions allowed interviewees to explore their sentiments and perspectives without overreliance on implicit assumptions about what AI and ML currently are or are not. This analysis, however, does not include the perspectives of other relevant stakeholder groups, such as patients, ethicists, industry researchers or representatives, or other health care professionals beyond physicians. Additional qualitative and quantitative research is needed to reproduce and build on these findings.

BACKGROUND: Integrating artificial intelligence (AI) into healthcare has raised significant ethical concerns. In pharmacy practice, AI offers promising advances but also poses ethical challenges.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in countries from the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region on 501 pharmacy professionals. A 12-item online questionnaire assessed ethical concerns related to the adoption of AI in pharmacy practice. Demographic factors associated with ethical concerns were analyzed via SPSS v.27 software using appropriate statistical tests.
RESULTS: Participants expressed concerns about patient data privacy (58.9%), cybersecurity threats (58.9%), potential job displacement (62.9%), and lack of legal regulation (67.0%). Tech-savviness and basic AI understanding were correlated with higher concern scores (p < 0.001). Ethical implications include the need for informed consent, beneficence, justice, and transparency in the use of AI.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings emphasize the importance of ethical guidelines, education, and patient autonomy in adopting AI. Collaboration, data privacy, and equitable access are crucial to the responsible use of AI in pharmacy practice.

This study explores orthodontists\' perspectives on risks associated with orthodontic treatment, as described by Greek and Slovak orthodontists. Informed by the foundational importance of effective communication of risk perspectives in health sciences, particularly in facilitating valid consent and shared decision-making, this research addresses gaps identified in the literature concerning the consistent communication of potential treatment risks based on demographic and cultural characteristics. This study identifies 15 potential critical risks during orthodontic treatment. These risks include root resorption; temporary undesired changes to the occlusion; sleep difficulties; not achieving an ideal result; development of black triangles between teeth; taking additional X-rays; speech difficulties; using a protective splint during sports; duration of treatment; number of visits; transmission of infectious diseases; and swallowing orthodontic appliances. A questionnaire, distributed electronically to orthodontists in Greece (N1 = 570) and Slovakia (N2 = 210) from September 2022 to December 2022, aimed to assess risk communication practices, taking into consideration socio-demographic factors, such as country, gender, age, and academic-degree-related variations. A total of 168 valid questionnaires (91 from Slovakia and 77 from Greece) were obtained, indicating significant disparities in the risks emphasized and preferred forms of consent. The Greek orthodontists focused more on the risks involved, such as relapse, root resorption, temporal occlusal changes, and failure of desired movement, while the Slovak practitioners tended to be more interested in sleeping difficulties, temporal occlusal changes, and not achieving an ideal result. They also obtained written or digital consent from patients or their parents/guardians more frequently than the Greek team. Male orthodontists discussed specific risks more frequently, including relapse and extractions, whereas females preferred written or digital consent. PhD-trained orthodontists prioritized certain risks, indicating the need for tailored approaches. This study underscores the dynamic nature of risk assessment in orthodontic practice, emphasizing its ethical and strategic dimensions. The findings advocate for tailored risk communication strategies that recognize individual, contextual, and cultural factors, and the need for an orthodontic informed consent protocol for a tailored communication approach for patients to elevate the standard of care in European orthodontics. The reliance on digital tools reflects contemporary trends in enhancing patient understanding, thereby supporting ongoing innovation in orthodontic practices.

Little is known about the general adult population\'s adoption of digital technology to support healthy lifestyle, especially when they are expected to take greater personal responsibility for managing their health and well-being today. The current qualitative study intended to gain an in-depth understanding of determinants of digital technology adoption for healthy lifestyle among community-dwelling adults in Singapore.
A qualitative study design, with thematic framework analysis was applied to develop themes from the data.
Semi-structured individual interviews were conducted with participants either face-to-face or online through a videoconferencing platform.
14 women and 16 men from the general population who were between the ages of 22 and 71 years.
Three major themes were developed: (1) digitally disempowered (2) safety and perceived risks and harm; (3) cultural values and drives. Adoption of technology among the general population is needs-driven, and contingent on individual, technological and other cross-cultural contextual factors.
Our findings highlight there is no one solution which fits all individuals, emphasizing the challenges of catering to diverse groups to reduce barriers to adoption of digital technologies for healthy lifestyle. Digital guidance and training, as well as social influences, can motivate technological adoption in the population. However, technical problems as well as data security and privacy concerns should first be adequately addressed. This study provides rich cross-cultural insights and informs policy-making due to its alignment with government public health initiatives to promote healthy lifestyle.

The return of genetics and genomics research results has been a subject of ongoing global debate. Such feedback is ethically desirable to update participants on research findings particularly those deemed clinically significant. Although there is limited literature, debate continues in African on what constitutes appropriate practice regarding the return of results for genetics and genomics research. This study explored perspectives and ethical considerations of Ugandan genomics researchers regarding the return of genetics and genomics research results.
This was a qualitative study that employed in-depth interviews. Thirty participants were purposively selected based on their expertise as genomics researchers in Uganda. Data were analysed through content analysis along the main themes of the study using a comprehensive thematic matrix, to identify common patterns arising from the narratives. NVivo software 12 was used to support data analysis.
The return of genetics and genomics research results was generally acceptable to researchers, and some indicated that they had previously returned individual or aggregate results to participants and communities. The main reasons cited for sharing research results with participants included their clinical utility, actionability and overall benefit to society. Ethical considerations for appropriate return of results included a need for effective community engagement, genetic counselling prior to disclosure of the results, adequate informed consent, and proper assessment of the implications of, or consequences of returning of results. However, the approaches to return of results were perceived as unstandardized due to the lack of appropriate regulatory frameworks.
The return of genetic and genomic research results is generally acceptable to researchers despite the lack of appropriate regulatory frameworks. Ethical considerations for return of genetics and genomics research results are highly divergent, hence the need for national ethical guidelines to appropriately regulate the practice.

Adolescence is a period in one\'s lifetime during which sexual maturation occurs. Major changes and increased sexual instinct raise many questions in the minds of adolescents. Receiving wrong education or inappropriate information can affect adolescents\' life and future deeply. Obviously, ethical considerations cannot be ignored in nationwide macro policies and educational programs on such a sensitive issue. In this qualitative study, we attempted to explore the ethical considerations and challenges of sex education for adolescents. The study was conducted between May 2015 and March 2017. Data were collected through semi-structured in-depth interviews with 25 participants, and MAXQDA 11 was used for coding. Six hundred sixty-two codes (662) were extracted and classified into four categories: 1) the potential risks of sex education for adolescents; 2) the advantages of sex education for adolescents, and the approaches; 3) the challenges in the interval between sexual maturation and marriage, and the role of religion; and 4) the measures implemented in Iran. Shame, embarrassment, and some cultural beliefs surrounding the subject of sex education are obstacles to providing adolescents with the necessary information. According to the principles of medical ethics, the main principle in sex education is beneficence, and sometimes infringement of confidentiality has its advantages.