The AI ethics of digital COVID-19 diagnosis and their legal, medical, technological, and operational managerial implications.

The COVID-19 pandemic has given rise to a broad range of research from fields alongside and beyond the core concerns of infectiology, epidemiology, and immunology. One significant subset of this work centers on machine learning-based approaches to supporting medical decision-making around COVID-19 diagnosis. To date, various challenges, including IT issues, have meant that, notwithstanding this strand of research on digital diagnosis of COVID-19, the actual use of these methods in medical facilities remains incipient at best, despite their potential to relieve pressure on scarce medical resources, prevent instances of infection, and help manage the difficulties and unpredictabilities surrounding the emergence of new mutations. The reasons behind this research-application gap are manifold and may imply an interdisciplinary dimension. We argue that the discipline of AI ethics can provide a framework for interdisciplinary discussion and create a roadmap for the application of digital COVID-19 diagnosis, taking into account all disciplinary stakeholders involved. This article proposes such an ethical framework for the practical use of digital COVID-19 diagnosis, considering legal, medical, operational managerial, and technological aspects of the issue in accordance with our diverse research backgrounds and noting the potential of the approach we set out here to guide future research.

[Genetic studies on forensic-psychiatric inpatients? : Clinical, ethical and legal considerations]. / Genetische Studien an forensisch Untergebrachten? : Klinische, ethische und juristische Überlegungen.

BACKGROUND: Research on people deprived of liberty raises serious questions, especially concerning behavioral genetic studies. QUESTION: Does including criminally detained patients with mental disorders in genetic studies lead to a gain of new knowledge and can this be ethically and legally justified? METHOD: Evaluation of existing literature and interdisciplinary reflection. RESULTS: After a review of research ethics and legal norms, we consider the benefits and risks of behavioral genetic research, taking the unique situation of test persons deprived of their liberty into account. The fundamental right to freedom of research also justifies foundational research in forensic psychiatry and psychotherapy. The possible future benefits of improving treatment plans must be weighed against the risks resulting from potential data leaks and inappropriate public reception of research results. Then we analyze possible threats to voluntary and informed consent to study participation in more detail by the ethical concept of vulnerability. Alongside problems with grasping complex issues, above all dependencies and power dynamics in the correctional system play a pivotal role. Recommendations on the ethical and legal inclusion of this study population are given. CONCLUSION: Including criminally detained study participants can be ethically and legally justified when autonomous consent is supported by specific organizational and legal procedures and measures, for example via a clear professional and organizational separation of correction and research.