skip to main content


Title: Ethics and society review: Ethics reflection as a precondition to research funding
Researchers in areas as diverse as computer science and political science must increasingly navigate the possible risks of their research to society. However, the history of medical experiments on vulnerable individuals influenced many research ethics reviews to focus exclusively on risks to human subjects rather than risks to human society. We describe an Ethics and Society Review board (ESR), which fills this moral gap by facilitating ethical and societal reflection as a requirement to access grant funding: Researchers cannot receive grant funding from participating pro-grams until the researchers complete the ESR process for their proposal. Researchers author an initial statement describing their proposed research’s risks to society, subgroups within society, and globally and commit to mitigation strategies for these risks. An interdisciplinary faculty panel iterates with the researchers to refine these risks and mitigation strategies. We describe a mixed-method evaluation of the ESR over 1 y, in partnership with an artificial intelligence grant program run by Stanford HAI. Surveys and interviews of researchers who interacted with the ESR found100% (95% CI: 87 to 100%) were willing to continue submitting future projects to the ESR, and 58% (95% CI: 37 to 77%) felt that it had influenced the design of their research project. The ESR panel most commonly identified issues of harms to minority groups, inclusion of diverse stakeholders in the research plan, dual use, and representation in datasets. These principles, paired with possible mitigation strategies, offer scaffolding for future research designs.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
2124734
NSF-PAR ID:
10343840
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ; ; ;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
Volume:
118
Issue:
52
ISSN:
0027-8424
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. In 2017, the report Undergraduate Research Experiences for STEM Students from the National Academy of Science and Engineering and Medicine (NASEM) invited research programs to develop experiences that extend from disciplinary knowledge and skills education. This call to action asks to include social responsibility learning goals in ethical development, cultural issues in research, and the promotion of inclusive learning environments. Moreover, the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET), the National Academy of Engineering (NAE), and the National Science Foundation (NSF) all agree that social responsibility is a significant component of an engineer’s professional formation and must be a guiding force in their education. Social Responsibility involves the ethical obligation engineers have to society and the environment, including responsible conduct research (RCR), ethical decision-making, human safety, sustainability, pro bono work, social justice, and diversity. For this work, we explored the views of Social Responsibility in engineering students that could provide insight into developing formal and informal educational activities for future summer programs. In this exploratory multi-methods study, we investigated the following research question: What views of social responsibility are important for engineering students conducting scientific in an NSF Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU)? The REU Site selected for this study was a college of engineering located at a major, public, comprehensive, land-grant research university. The Views of Social Responsibility of Scientists and Engineers (VSRoSE) was used to guide our research design. This validated instrument considers the following major social responsibility elements: 1) Consideration of societal consequences, 2) Protection of human welfare and safety, 3) Promotion of environmental sustainability, 4) Efforts to minimize risks, 5) Communication with the public, and 6) Service and Community engagement. Data collection was conducted at the end of their 10-week-long experience in Summer 2022 using Qualtrics. REU students were invited to complete an IRB-approved questionnaire, including collecting demographic data, the VSRoSE-validated survey, and open-ended questions. Open-ended questions were used to explore what experiences have influenced positive student views of social responsibility and provide rich information beyond the six elements of the VSRoSE instrument. The quantitative data from the VSRoSE is analyzed using SPSS. The qualitative data is analyzed by the research team using an inductive coding approach. In this coding process, the researchers derive codes from the data allowing the narrative or theory to emerge from the raw data itself, which is great for exploratory research. The results from this exploratory study will help to strategically initiate a formal and informal research education curriculum at the selected university. In addition, the results may serve as a way for REU administrators and faculty to create metrics of impact on their research activities regarding social responsibility. Finally, this work intends to provoke the ethics and research community to have a deeper conversation about the needs and strategies to educate this unique population of students. 
    more » « less
  2. Abstract STUDY QUESTION

    To what extent is preconception maternal or paternal coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination associated with miscarriage incidence?

    SUMMARY ANSWER

    COVID-19 vaccination in either partner at any time before conception is not associated with an increased rate of miscarriage.

    WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

    Several observational studies have evaluated the safety of COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy and found no association with miscarriage, though no study prospectively evaluated the risk of early miscarriage (gestational weeks [GW] <8) in relation to COVID-19 vaccination. Moreover, no study has evaluated the role of preconception vaccination in both male and female partners.

    STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

    An Internet-based, prospective preconception cohort study of couples residing in the USA and Canada. We analyzed data from 1815 female participants who conceived during December 2020–November 2022, including 1570 couples with data on male partner vaccination.

    PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

    Eligible female participants were aged 21–45 years and were trying to conceive without use of fertility treatment at enrollment. Female participants completed questionnaires at baseline, every 8 weeks until pregnancy, and during early and late pregnancy; they could also invite their male partners to complete a baseline questionnaire. We collected data on COVID-19 vaccination (brand and date of doses), history of SARS-CoV-2 infection (yes/no and date of positive test), potential confounders (demographic, reproductive, and lifestyle characteristics), and pregnancy status on all questionnaires. Vaccination status was categorized as never (0 doses before conception), ever (≥1 dose before conception), having a full primary sequence before conception, and completing the full primary sequence ≤3 months before conception. These categories were not mutually exclusive. Participants were followed up from their first positive pregnancy test until miscarriage or a censoring event (induced abortion, ectopic pregnancy, loss to follow-up, 20 weeks’ gestation), whichever occurred first. We estimated incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for miscarriage and corresponding 95% CIs using Cox proportional hazards models with GW as the time scale. We used propensity score fine stratification weights to adjust for confounding.

    MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

    Among 1815 eligible female participants, 75% had received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine by the time of conception. Almost one-quarter of pregnancies resulted in miscarriage, and 75% of miscarriages occurred <8 weeks’ gestation. The propensity score-weighted IRR comparing female participants who received at least one dose any time before conception versus those who had not been vaccinated was 0.85 (95% CI: 0.63, 1.14). COVID-19 vaccination was not associated with increased risk of either early miscarriage (GW: <8) or late miscarriage (GW: 8–19). There was no indication of an increased risk of miscarriage associated with male partner vaccination (IRR = 0.90; 95% CI: 0.56, 1.44).

    LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

    The present study relied on self-reported vaccination status and infection history. Thus, there may be some non-differential misclassification of exposure status. While misclassification of miscarriage is also possible, the preconception cohort design and high prevalence of home pregnancy testing in this cohort reduced the potential for under-ascertainment of miscarriage. As in all observational studies, residual or unmeasured confounding is possible.

    WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

    This is the first study to evaluate prospectively the relation between preconception COVID-19 vaccination in both partners and miscarriage, with more complete ascertainment of early miscarriages than earlier studies of vaccination. The findings are informative for individuals planning a pregnancy and their healthcare providers.

    STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

    This work was supported by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, the National Institute of Health [R01-HD086742 (PI: L.A.W.); R01-HD105863S1 (PI: L.A.W. and M.L.E.)], the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (R03-AI154544; PI: A.K.R.), and the National Science Foundation (NSF-1914792; PI: L.A.W.). The funders had no role in the study design, data collection, analysis and interpretation of data, writing of the report, or the decision to submit the paper for publication. L.A.W. is a fibroid consultant for AbbVie, Inc. She also receives in-kind donations from Swiss Precision Diagnostics (Clearblue home pregnancy tests) and Kindara.com (fertility apps). M.L.E. received consulting fees from Ro, Hannah, Dadi, VSeat, and Underdog, holds stock in Ro, Hannah, Dadi, and Underdog, is a past president of SSMR, and is a board member of SMRU. K.F.H. reports being an investigator on grants to her institution from UCB and Takeda, unrelated to this study. S.H.-D. reports being an investigator on grants to her institution from Takeda, unrelated to this study, and a methods consultant for UCB and Roche for unrelated drugs. The authors report no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

    TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

    N/A.

     
    more » « less
  3. Abstract

    Plants, and the biological systems around them, are key to the future health of the planet and its inhabitants. The Plant Science Decadal Vision 2020–2030 frames our ability to perform vital and far‐reaching research in plant systems sciences, essential to how we value participants and apply emerging technologies. We outline a comprehensive vision for addressing some of our most pressing global problems through discovery, practical applications, and education. The Decadal Vision was developed by the participants at the Plant Summit 2019, a community event organized by the Plant Science Research Network. The Decadal Vision describes a holistic vision for the next decade of plant science that blends recommendations for research, people, and technology. Going beyond discoveries and applications, we, the plant science community, must implement bold, innovative changes to research cultures and training paradigms in this era of automation, virtualization, and the looming shadow of climate change. Our vision and hopes for the next decade are encapsulated in the phrase reimagining the potential of plants for a healthy and sustainable future. The Decadal Vision recognizes the vital intersection of human and scientific elements and demands an integrated implementation of strategies for research (Goals 1–4), people (Goals 5 and 6), and technology (Goals 7 and 8). This report is intended to help inspire and guide the research community, scientific societies, federal funding agencies, private philanthropies, corporations, educators, entrepreneurs, and early career researchers over the next 10 years. The research encompass experimental and computational approaches to understanding and predicting ecosystem behavior; novel production systems for food, feed, and fiber with greater crop diversity, efficiency, productivity, and resilience that improve ecosystem health; approaches to realize the potential for advances in nutrition, discovery and engineering of plant‐based medicines, and green infrastructure. Launching the Transparent Plant will use experimental and computational approaches to break down the phytobiome into a parts store that supports tinkering and supports query, prediction, and rapid‐response problem solving. Equity, diversity, and inclusion are indispensable cornerstones of realizing our vision. We make recommendations around funding and systems that support customized professional development. Plant systems are frequently taken for granted therefore we make recommendations to improve plant awareness and community science programs to increase understanding of scientific research. We prioritize emerging technologies, focusing on non‐invasive imaging, sensors, and plug‐and‐play portable lab technologies, coupled with enabling computational advances. Plant systems science will benefit from data management and future advances in automation, machine learning, natural language processing, and artificial intelligence‐assisted data integration, pattern identification, and decision making. Implementation of this vision will transform plant systems science and ripple outwards through society and across the globe. Beyond deepening our biological understanding, we envision entirely new applications. We further anticipate a wave of diversification of plant systems practitioners while stimulating community engagement, underpinning increasing entrepreneurship. This surge of engagement and knowledge will help satisfy and stoke people's natural curiosity about the future, and their desire to prepare for it, as they seek fuller information about food, health, climate and ecological systems.

     
    more » « less
  4. Background: Nursing home (NH) residents and staff were at high risk for COVID-19 early in the pandemic; several studies estimated seroprevalence of infection in NH staff to be 3-fold higher among CNAs and nurses compared to other staff. Risk mitigation added in Fall 2020 included systematic testing of residents and staff (and furlough if positive) to reduce transmission risk. We estimated risks for SARS-CoV-2 infection among NH staff during the first winter surge before widespread vaccination. Methods: Between February and May 2021, voluntary serologic testing was performed on NH staff who were seronegative for SARS-CoV-2 in late Fall 2020 (during a previous serology study at 14 Georgia NHs). An exposure assessment at the second time point covered prior 3 months of job activities, community exposures, and self-reported COVID-19 vaccination, including very recent vaccination (≤4 weeks). Risk factors for seroconversion were estimated by job type using multivariable logistic regression, accounting for interval community-incidence and interval change in resident infections per bed. Results: Among 203 eligible staff, 72 (35.5%) had evidence of interval seroconversion (Fig. 1). Among 80 unvaccinated staff, interval infection was significantly higher among CNAs and nurses (aOR, 4.9; 95% CI, 1.4–20.7) than other staff, after adjusting for race and interval community incidence and facility infections. This risk persisted but was attenuated when utilizing the full study cohort including those with very recent vaccination (aOR, 1.8; 95% CI, 0.9–3.7). Conclusions : Midway through the first year of the pandemic, NH staff with close or common resident contact continued to be at increased risk for infection despite enhanced infection prevention efforts. Mitigation strategies, prior to vaccination, did not eliminate occupational risk for infection. Vaccine utilization is critical to eliminate occupational risk among frontline healthcare providers. Funding: None Disclosures: None 
    more » « less
  5. Through a series of ACM SIGCHI workshops, we have built a research community of individuals dedicated to networked privacy--from identifying the key challenges to designing privacy solutions and setting a privacy-focused agenda for the future. In this workshop, we take an intentional pause to unpack the potential ethical questions and concerns this agenda might raise. Rather than strictly focusing on privacy as a state that is always desired--where more privacy is viewed unequivocally as "better"--we consider situations where privacy may not be optimal for researchers, end users, or society. We discuss the current research landscape, including the recent updates to the ACM's Code of Ethics, and how researchers and designers can make more informed decisions regarding ethics, privacy, and other competing values in privacy-related research and designs. Our workshop includes group discussions, breakout activities, and a panel of experts with diverse insights discussing topics related to privacy and ethics. 
    more » « less