4.5 Review

Ethical considerations for precision psychiatry: A roadmap for research and clinical practice

期刊

EUROPEAN NEUROPSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY
卷 63, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.euroneuro.2022.08.001

关键词

Ethics; Prevention; Precision medicine; Artificial intelligence; Bipolar disorders; Psychosis

资金

  1. European Brain Research Area project
  2. European Union [825348]
  3. H2020 Societal Challenges Programme [825348] Funding Source: H2020 Societal Challenges Programme

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article is a critical review on the importance and ethical challenges of precision psychiatry. It aims to address these challenges and issues by designing a roadmap for research and clinical practice, promoting the development and application of precision psychiatry, and benefiting patients.
Precision psychiatry is an emerging field with transformative opportunities for mental health. However, the use of clinical prediction models carries unprecedented ethical challenges, which must be addressed before accessing the potential benefits of precision psychiatry. This critical review covers multidisciplinary areas, including psychiatry, ethics, statistics and machine-teaming, healthcare and academia, as well as input from people with lived experience of mental disorders, their family, and carers. We aimed to identify core ethical considerations for precision psychiatry and mitigate concerns by designing a roadmap for research and clinical practice. We identified priorities: teaming from somatic medicine; identifying precision psychiatry use cases; enhancing transparency and generalizability; fostering implementation; promoting mental health literacy; communicating risk estimates; data protection and privacy; and fostering the equitable distribution of mental health care. We hope this blueprint will advance research and practice and enable people with mental health problems to benefit from precision psychiatry. (C) 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据