Ethical, Legal, and Sociocultural Issues in the Use of Mobile Technologies and Call Detail Records Data for Public Health in the East African Region: Scoping Review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The exponential scale and pace of real-time data generated from mobile phones present opportunities for new insights and challenges across multiple sectors, including health care delivery and public health research. However, little attention has been given to the new ethical, social, and legal concerns related to using these mobile technologies and the data they generate in Africa. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this scoping review was to explore the ethical and related concerns that arise from the use of data from call detail records and mobile technology interventions for public health in the context of East Africa. METHODS: We searched the PubMed database for published studies describing ethical challenges while using mobile technologies and related data in public health research between 2000 and 2020. A predefined search strategy was used as inclusion criteria with search terms such as "East Africa," "mHealth," "mobile phone data," "public health," "ethics," or "privacy." We screened studies using prespecified eligibility criteria through a two-stage process by two independent reviewers. Studies were included if they were (1) related to mobile technology use and health, (2) published in English from 2000 to 2020, (3) available in full text, and (4) conducted in the East African region. We excluded articles that (1) were conference proceedings, (2) studies presenting an abstract only, (3) systematic and literature reviews, (4) research protocols, and (5) reports of mobile technology in animal subjects. We followed the five stages of a published framework for scoping reviews recommended by Arksey and O'Malley. Data extracted included title, publication year, target population, geographic region, setting, and relevance to mobile health (mHealth) and ethics. Additionally, we used the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) Extension for Scoping Reviews checklist to guide the presentation of this scoping review. The rationale for focusing on the five countries in East Africa was their geographic proximity, which lends itself to similarities in technology infrastructure development. RESULTS: Of the 94 studies identified from PubMed, 33 met the review inclusion criteria for the final scoping review. The 33 articles retained in the final scoping review represent studies conducted in three out of five East African countries: 14 (42%) from Uganda, 13 (39%) from Kenya, and 5 (16%) from Tanzania. Three main categories of concerns related to the use of mHealth technologies and mobile phone data can be conceptualized as (1) ethical issues (adequate informed consent, privacy and confidentiality, data security and protection), (2) sociocultural issues, and (3) regulatory/legal issues. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review identified major cross-cutting ethical, regulatory, and sociocultural concerns related to using data from mobile technologies in the East African region. A comprehensive framework that accounts for the critical concerns raised would be valuable for guiding the safe use of mobile technology data for public health research purposes.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,105 | 0,363 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,021 | 0,019 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,007 |
| Communication savante | 0,009 | 0,012 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,006 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,007 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».