Page 113 - ITU Journal - ICT Discoveries - Volume 1, No. 2, December 2018 - Second special issue on Data for Good
P. 113
ITU JOURNAL: ICT Discoveries, Vol. 1(2), December 2018
[ 1 6 ] N i s s e n b a u m H . P r i v a c y i n C o n t e x t : [26] Prainsack B, Buyx A. Solidarity In
Technology, Policy, and the Integrity of Social Contemporary Bioethics—Towards A New
Life. Stanford, California: Stanford University Approach. Bioethics 2012;26:343–50.
Press; 2009.
[27] Vayena E, Tasioulas J. “We the Scientists”: a
[17] Floridi L, editor. The Onlife Manifesto: Being Human Right to Citizen Science. Philos
Human in a Hyperconnected Era. Springer Technol 2015;28:479–85.
Open; 2015. doi:10.1007/s13347-015-0204-0.
[18] Yang Y, Fasching PA, Tresp V. Predictive [28] Mittelstadt BD, Floridi L. The Ethics of Big
Modeling of Therapy Decisions in Metastatic Data: Current and Foreseeable Issues in
Breast Cancer with Recurrent Neural Biomedical Contexts. Sci Eng Ethics
N e t w o r k E n c o d e r a n d M u l t i n o m i a l 2016;22:303–41.
Hierarchical Regression Decoder. 2017 IEEE
International Conference on Healthcare [29] Braun M, Dabrock P. Ethische
Informatics (ICHI), 2017, p. 46–55. Herausforderungen einer sogenannten Big-
Data basierten Medizin. Zeitschrift Für
[19] Institute of Medicine. The Learning Medizinische Ethik 2016;4/2016.
Healthcare System: Workshop Summary.
Washington, D.C.: The National Academic [30] Mittelstadt B, Benzler J, Engelmann L,
Press; 2007. Prainsack B, Vayena E. Is there a duty to
participate in digital epidemiology? Life Sci
[20] Faden RR, Kass NE, Goodman SN, Pronovost P, Soc Policy 2018;14:9.
Tunis S, Beauchamp TL. An Ethics Framework
for a Learning Health Care System: A [31] Cargill SS. Biobanking and the Abandonment
Departure from Traditional Research Ethics of Informed Consent: An Ethical Imperative.
and Clinical Ethics. Hastings Center Report Public Health Ethics 2016;9:255–63.
2013;43:16–27.
[32] Budin-Ljøsne I, Teare HJA, Kaye J, Beck S,
[21] Bialobrzeski A, Ried J, Dabrock P. Bentzen HB, Caenazzo L, et al. Dynamic
Differentiating and Evaluating Common Good Consent: a potential solution to some of the
a n d P u b l i c G o o d : M a k i n g I m p l i c i t challenges of modern biomedical research.
Assumptions Explicit in the Contexts of BMC Med Ethics 2017;18:4.
Consent and Duty to Participate. PHG
2012;15:285–92. doi:10.1159/000336861. [33] Vayena E, Blasimme A. Biomedical Big Data:
New Models of Control Over Access, Use and
[22] Bedorf T. Gabe, Recht und Ethik in Hénaffs Governance. J Bioeth Inq 2017;14:501–13.
anthropologischer Genealogie der
Anerkennung. Westend 2010;7:123–32. [34] Montgomery J. Data Sharing and the Idea of
Ownership. The New Bioethics 2017;23:81–6.
[23] Hénaff M. The Price of Truth: Gift, Money, and
Philosophy. Stanford, California: Stanford [35] Thouvenin F, Weber RH, Früh A. Data
University Press; 2010. ownership: Taking stock and mapping the
issues. In: Dehmer M, Emmert-Streib F,
[24] Hénaff M. Ceremonial Gift-Giving: The editors. Frontiers in Data Science, Boca Raton:
Lessons of Anthropology from Mauss and CRC Press; 2017, p. 111–45.
Beyond. In: Satlow ML, editor. The Gift in
Antiquity, Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell; 2013, [36] Fezer K-H. Repräsentatives Dateneigentum.
p. 12–24. Ein zivilgesellschaftliches Bürgerrecht. Sankt
Augustin & Berlin: Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung;
[25] Haeusermann T, Greshake B, Blasimme A, 2018.
Irdam D, Richards M, Vayena E. Open sharing
of genomic data: Who does it and why? PLOS [37] Gray J, Gerlitz C, Bounegru L. Data
ONE 2017;12:e0177158. infrastructure literacy. Big Data & Society
2018;5:2053951718786316.
© International Telecommunication Union, 2018 91
