EysenbachG., “Medicine 2.0: Social Networking, Collaboration, Participation, Apomediation, and Openness,”Journal of Medical Internet Research10, no. 3 (2008): e22, available at <http://www.jmir.org/2008/3/e22/> (last visited April 11, 2013).
2.
See also O'ConnorD., “Apomediation and Ancillary Care: Researchers' Responsibilities in Health-Related Online Communities,”IJIRE3, no. 1 (2010): 87–103.
3.
SwanM., “DIYgenomics Crowdsourced Health Research Studies: PersonalWellness and Preventive Medicine through Collective Intelligence,”AAAI Spring Symposium Series, North America (March 2012): 54–59, available at <www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/SSS/SSS12/paper/view/4293/4681> (last visited Apr 22, 2013).
Several of the public commentaries on the proposed changes do mention social media platforms, particularly Facebook. I address these commentaries later in the paper.
9.
FornaiF., “Lithium Delays Progression of Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis,”Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America105, no. 6 (February 12, 2008): 2052–2057.
10.
WicksP., T. Vaughn, M. Massagli, and J. Haywood, “Accelerated Clinical Discovery Using Self-Reported Patient Data Collected Online and a Patient-Matching Algorithm,”Nature Biotechnology29, no. 5 (2011): 411–414.
11.
VerstraateE., “Lithium Lacks Effect on Survival in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis: A Phase IIb Randomised Sequential Trial,”Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry83, no. 5 (May 2012): 557–564.
See WicksVaughanMassagliHeywood, supra note 6, at 411.
16.
See HoweJ., “Crowdsourcing: A Definition,” available at <www.crowdsourcing.com> (last visited April 11, 2013).
17.
E. Estellés-Arolas and Fernando González-Ladrón-de-Guevara, “Towards and Integrated Crowdsourcing Definition,”Journal of Information Science38, no. 2 (April 2012): 189–200.
18.
ArmstrongA. W.HarskampC. T.CheenyS., J. Wu, and C. W. Schupp, “Power of Crowdsourcing: Novel Methods of Data Collection in Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis,”Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology67, no. 6 (December 2012): 1273–1281;
19.
Kamel BoulosM. N., “Crowdsourcing, Citizen Sensing and Sensor Web Technologies for Public and Environmental Health Surveillance and Crisis Management: Trends, OGC Standards and Application Examples,”International Journal of Health Geographics10, no. 67 (December 21, 2011), available at <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3271966/> (last visited April 11, 2013);
20.
BehrendT. S.SharekD. J.MeadeA. W.WiebeE. N., “The Viability of Crowdsourcing for Survey Research,”Behavior Research Methods43, no. 3 (September 2011): 800–813.
21.
SwanM., “Crowdsourced Health Research Studies: An Important Emerging Complement to Clinical Trials in the Public Health Research Ecosystem,”Journal of Medical Internet Research14, no. 2 (March-April 2012): e46, available at <http://www.jmir.org/2012/2/e46/> (last visited April 11, 2013).
Code of Federal Regulations TITLE 45: PUBLIC WELFARE: DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES: PART 45. PROTECTION OF HUMAN SUBJECTS, 46.406 (January 15, 2009), available at <http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/45cfr46.html#46.406> (last visited April 11, 2013.
25.
Code of Federal Regulations Title 45: Public Welfare: Department of Health and Human Services: Part 45. Protection of Human Subjects, 46.101 (January 15, 2009), available at <http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/45cfr46.html#46.101> (last visited April 11, 2013).
See RothmanD. J., Strangers at the Bedside: A History of How Law and Bioethics Transformed Medical Decision Making (New York: BasicBooks, 1991);
29.
A. R. Jonsen, The Birth of Bioethics (New York: Oxford University Press, 1998).
30.
See, variously, Rothman, supra note 20: 127–189;
31.
Jonsen, supra note 20: 90–165;
32.
S. Reverby, Examining Tuskegee: The Infamous Syphilis Study and Its Legacy (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1999);
33.
MorenoJ., “Goodbye to All That: The End of Moderate Protectionism in Human Subjects Research?”The Hastings Center Report31, no. 3 (May-June 2001): 9–17;
34.
MastroianniA.KahnJ., “Swinging on the Pendulum: Shifting Views of Justice in Human Subjects Research,”The Hastings Center Report31, no. 3 (May-June 2001): 21–28;
35.
GoodmanJ.McElligottA.MarksL., “Making Human Bodies Useful: Historicizing Medical Experiments in the Twentieth Century,” in GoodmanJ.McElligottA.MarksL., eds., Useful Bodies: Humans in the Service of Medical Science in the Twentieth Century (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2003): At 1–26. On the idea that research regulations enable medical research to be conducted on healthy people as much as they restrain the practice, see Laura Stark, Behind Closed Doors: IRBs and the Making of Ethical Research (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2012).
36.
See Reverby, supra note 21;
37.
HowellJ. D.HaywardR. A., “Writing Willowbrook, Reading Willowbroook: The Recounting of a Medical Experiment,” in GoodmanMcElligottMarks, eds., supra note 21, at 190–214;
38.
MulfordR. D., “Experimentation on Human Beings,”Stanford Law Review, 20, no. 1 (November 1967): 99–117;
39.
MitfordJ., “Experiments Behind Bars: Doctors, Drug Companies and Prisoners,”Atlantic Monthly23, 1 (January 1973): 138–168.
40.
BeecherH. K., “Ethics and Clinical Research,”New England Journal of Medicine274, no. 24 (June 16, 1966): 1354–1360.
Some questions have been addressed in the following: Soo-Jin LeeS.CrawleyL., “Research 2.0: Social Networking and Direct-to-Consumer (DTC) Genomics,”American Journal of Bioethics9, nos. 6–7 (2009): 35–44;
49.
O'ConnorD., “Apomediation and the Significance of Social Networking,”American Journal of Bioethics9, nos. 6–7 (2009): 25–27.
ChretienK. C.Ryan GreysenS.ChretienJ.-P.KindT., “Online Posting of Unprofessional Content by Medical Students,”Journal of the American Medical Association302, no. 12 (2009): 1309–1315;
56.
TorvikK.SingbeilC., “What Goes Online Is on the Record,”Canadian Nurse104, no. 5 (2008): 21;
57.
GusehJ. S.IIBrendelR. W.BrendelD. H., “Medical Professionalism in the Age of Online Social Networking,”Journal of Medical Ethics35, 9(2009): 584–586.
58.
AnnasG. J., “Medical Privacy and Medical Research – Judging the New Federal Regulations,”New England Journal of Medicine346, 3(2002): 216–220.
SignoriniA.SegreA. M.PolgreenP. M., “The Use of Twitter to Track Levels of Disease Activity and Public Concern in the U.S. during the Influenza A H1N1 Pandemic,”PLoS ONE6, no. 5 (2011): e19467, available at <http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0019467> (last visited April 11, 2013).
Interestingly, social and behavioral scientists have seen this shift as a way to avoid IRB scrutiny, arguing in comment #1102 that Facebook updates are “publicly available” and thus any research into them (or similarly ‘public’ social media content) should qualify for expedited review. See: American Educational Research Association et al., Social and Behavioral Science White Paper on Advanced Notice for Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) Federal Register 44512–531 (July 26, 2011), ID Docket HHS-OPHS-2011-0005: 12, available at <http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=HHS-OPHS-2011-0005-1102> (last visited April 11, 2013).
70.
See WicksVaughanMassagliHeywood, supra note 6.
71.
See, for example, GawandeA., “A Lifesaving Checklist,”New York Times, December 30, 2007;
72.
Nassir GhaemiS.GoodwinF. K., “The Ethics of Clinical Innovation in Psychopharmacology: Challenging Traditional Bioethics,”Philosophy, Ethics and Humanities in Medicine2, no. 26 (2007), available at <http://www.peh-med.com/content/2/1/26> (last visited April 11, 2013);
73.
Z. M. Schrag, Ethical Imperialism: Institutional Review Boards and the Social Sciences, 1965–2009 (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2010).