IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i3p1510-d737084.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Health Technology Assessment for In Silico Medicine: Social, Ethical and Legal Aspects

Author

Listed:
  • Carlo Giacomo Leo

    (Institute of Clinical Physiology, National Research Council, 73100 Lecce, Italy
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Maria Rosaria Tumolo

    (Institute of Clinical Physiology, National Research Council, 73100 Lecce, Italy
    Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences and Technology, University of Salento, 73100 Lecce, Italy
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Saverio Sabina

    (Institute of Clinical Physiology, National Research Council, 73100 Lecce, Italy)

  • Riccardo Colella

    (Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences and Technology, University of Salento, 73100 Lecce, Italy)

  • Virginia Recchia

    (Institute of Clinical Physiology, National Research Council, 73100 Lecce, Italy)

  • Giuseppe Ponzini

    (Institute for Research on Population and Social Policies, National Research Council, 72100 Brindisi, Italy)

  • Dimitrios Ioannis Fotiadis

    (Unit of Medical Technology and Intelligent Information Systems, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Ioannina, 45110 Ioannina, Greece
    Department of Biomedical Research, Institute of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology—Foundation for Research and Technology Hellas (IMBB-FORTH), 45115 Ioannina, Greece)

  • Antonella Bodini

    (Institute for Applied Mathematics and Information Technologies “E. Magenes”, National Research Council, 20133 Milan, Italy)

  • Pierpaolo Mincarone

    (Institute for Research on Population and Social Policies, National Research Council, 72100 Brindisi, Italy)

Abstract

The application of in silico medicine is constantly growing in the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of diseases. These technologies allow us to support medical decisions and self-management and reduce, refine, and partially replace real studies of medical technologies. In silico medicine may challenge some key principles: transparency and fairness of data usage; data privacy and protection across platforms and systems; data availability and quality; data integration and interoperability; intellectual property; data sharing; equal accessibility for persons and populations. Several social, ethical, and legal issues may consequently arise from its adoption. In this work, we provide an overview of these issues along with some practical suggestions for their assessment from a health technology assessment perspective. We performed a narrative review with a search on MEDLINE/Pubmed, ISI Web of Knowledge, Scopus, and Google Scholar. The following key aspects emerge as general reflections with an impact on the operational level: cultural resistance, level of expertise of users, degree of patient involvement, infrastructural requirements, risks for health, respect of several patients’ rights, potential discriminations for access and use of the technology, and intellectual property of innovations. Our analysis shows that several challenges still need to be debated to allow in silico medicine to express all its potential in healthcare processes.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlo Giacomo Leo & Maria Rosaria Tumolo & Saverio Sabina & Riccardo Colella & Virginia Recchia & Giuseppe Ponzini & Dimitrios Ioannis Fotiadis & Antonella Bodini & Pierpaolo Mincarone, 2022. "Health Technology Assessment for In Silico Medicine: Social, Ethical and Legal Aspects," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-13, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:3:p:1510-:d:737084
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/3/1510/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/3/1510/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Luc Rocher & Julien M. Hendrickx & Yves-Alexandre de Montjoye, 2019. "Estimating the success of re-identifications in incomplete datasets using generative models," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 10(1), pages 1-9, December.
    2. Buckley, Jenifer A. & Thompson, Paul B. & Whyte, Kyle Powys, 2017. "Collingridge's dilemma and the early ethical assessment of emerging technology: The case of nanotechnology enabled biosensors," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 54-63.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Whitney R. Garney & Kelly L. Wilson & Kristen M. Garcia & Daenuka Muraleetharan & Christi H. Esquivel & Mandy N. Spadine & Sonya Panjwani & Kobi V. Ajayi, 2022. "Supporting and Enabling the Process of Innovation in Public Health: The Framework for Public Health Innovation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-11, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. John R. J. Thompson & Longlong Feng & R. Mark Reesor & Chuck Grace, 2021. "Know Your Clients’ Behaviours: A Cluster Analysis of Financial Transactions," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(2), pages 1-29, January.
    2. Ron S. Jarmin & John M. Abowd & Robert Ashmead & Ryan Cumings-Menon & Nathan Goldschlag & Michael B. Hawes & Sallie Ann Keller & Daniel Kifer & Philip Leclerc & Jerome P. Reiter & Rolando A. Rodrígue, 2023. "An in-depth examination of requirements for disclosure risk assessment," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 120(43), pages 2220558120-, October.
    3. Ratul Das Chaudhury & Chongwoo Choe, 2023. "Digital Privacy: GDPR and Its Lessons for Australia," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 56(2), pages 204-220, June.
    4. Rehse, Dominik & Tremöhlen, Felix, 2020. "Fostering participation in digital public health interventions: The case of digital contact tracing," ZEW Discussion Papers 20-076, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    5. Undheim, Trond Arne, 2024. "In search of better methods for the longitudinal assessment of tech-derived X-risks: How five leading scenario planning efforts can help," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    6. Tesary Lin & Sanjog Misra, 2022. "Frontiers: The Identity Fragmentation Bias," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(3), pages 433-440, May.
    7. Atabey, Ayça & Pothong, Kruakae & Livingstone, Sonia, 2023. "Glossary of terms relating to children’s digital lives," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 119728, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. German Data Forum RatSWD (ed.), 2020. "Data collection using new information technology," RatSWD Output Series, German Data Forum (RatSWD), volume 6, number 6-6en.
    9. Jeongwook Lee & Joon Jin Song & Yongku Kim & Jung In Seo, 2020. "Estimation and Prediction of Record Values Using Pivotal Quantities and Copulas," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-16, October.
    10. Raza, Syed Arshad, 2021. "Managing ethical requirements elicitation of complex socio-technical systems with critical systems thinking: A case of course-timetabling project," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    11. Miren Gutierrez & John Bryant, 2022. "The Fading Gloss of Data Science: Towards an Agenda that Faces the Challenges of Big Data for Development and Humanitarian Action," Development, Palgrave Macmillan;Society for International Deveopment, vol. 65(1), pages 80-93, March.
    12. Se-Ra Oh & Young-Duk Seo & Euijong Lee & Young-Gab Kim, 2021. "A Comprehensive Survey on Security and Privacy for Electronic Health Data," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-48, September.
    13. Sevgi Arca & Rattikorn Hewett, 2021. "Analytics on Anonymity for Privacy Retention in Smart Health Data," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-20, October.
    14. Ahn, Sang-Jin & Yoon, Ho Young & Lee, Young-Joo, 2021. "Text mining as a tool for real-time technology assessment: Application to the cross-national comparative study on artificial organ technology," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    15. Elisabeth Eppinger, 2021. "How Open Innovation Practices Deliver Societal Benefits," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-19, January.
    16. James Steele & Matthew Wade & Robert J. Copeland & Stuart Stokes & Rachel Stokes & Steven Mann, 2021. "The National ReferAll Database: An Open Dataset of Exercise Referral Schemes Across the UK," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-17, April.
    17. Heng Xu & Nan Zhang, 2022. "Implications of Data Anonymization on the Statistical Evidence of Disparity," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(4), pages 2600-2618, April.
    18. Anastasia Roukouni & Gonçalo Homem de Almeida Correia, 2020. "Evaluation Methods for the Impacts of Shared Mobility: Classification and Critical Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-22, December.
    19. Till Koebe & Alejandra Arias-Salazar & Timo Schmid, 2023. "Releasing survey microdata with exact cluster locations and additional privacy safeguards," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-13, December.
    20. Frederiksen, Marianne Harbo & Wolf, Patricia & Klotz, Ute, 2024. "Citizen visions of drone uses and impacts in 2057: Far-future insights for policy decision-makers," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:3:p:1510-:d:737084. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.