Search

Digital government has digitized numerous public services, automated decision-making, and improved the openness of the public administration. Nevertheless, for senior citizens, undeserved communities, individuals with low literacy and limited digital skills, the shift to governmental portals, online payments, and smartphone applications are considerable obstacles in their daily interactions with public authorities. This chapter argues that digital inequality denies vulnerable citizens their rights twice: first, their ethnicity and socioeconomic status may be conducive to a ‘negative’ ranking or score (e.g., higher risk of welfare fraud); and second, they are also excluded because they do not have adequate access to technology, are not well informed, and do not have the time and skills required to interact with digital government. This chapter explores one of the paradoxes of the digital society: connected citizens in developed countries are also affected by the digital divide and are increasingly being excluded by the generalized digitalization of public services. Drawing on a review of interdisciplinary literature, this chapter contributes to the legal literature with an account of the underlying causes of digital exclusion and a discussion of its most relevant legal implications through the lenses of fundamental rights (e.g., due process, equal treatment) and the principles of good administration. This chapter reflects on potential solutions for more inclusive digital government policies.

Frontiers in neurorobotics 16, 953968 (2022). doi:10.3389/fnbot.2022.953968 special issue: "Rising Stars in Neurorobotics 2021", Published by Frontiers Research Foundation, Lausanne

In recent years, philosophical-legal studies on neuroscience (mainly in the fields of neuroethics and neurolaw) have given increasing prominence to a normative analysis of the ethical-legal challenges in the mind and brain sciences in terms of rights, freedoms, entitlements and associated obligations. This way of analyzing the ethical and legal implications of neuroscience has come to be known as “neurorights.” Neurorights can be defined as the ethical, legal, social, or natural principles of freedom or entitlement related to a person’s cerebral and mental domain; that is, the fundamental normative rules for the protection and preservation of the human brain and mind. Although reflections on neurorights have received ample coverage in the mainstream media and have rapidly become a mainstream topic in the public neuroethics discourse, the frequency of such reflections in the academic literature is still relatively scarce. While the prominence of the neurorights debate in public opinion is crucial to ensure public engagement and democratic participation in deliberative processes on this issue, its relatively sporadic presence in the academic literature poses a risk of semantic-normative ambiguity and conceptual confusion. This risk is exacerbated by the presence of multiple and not always reconcilable terminologies. Several meta-ethical, normative ethical, and legal-philosophical questions need to be solved in order to ensure that neurorights can be used as effective instruments of global neurotechnology governance and be adequately imported into international human rights law. To overcome the shortcomings above, this paper attempts to provide a comprehensive normative-ethical, historical and conceptual analysis of neurorights. In particular, it attempts to (i) reconstruct a history of neurorights and locate these rights in the broader history of idea, (ii) outline a systematic conceptual taxonomy of neurorights, (iii) summarize ongoing policy initiatives related to neurorights, (iv) proactively address some unresolved ethico-legal challenges, and (v) identify priority areas for further academic reflection and policy work in this domain. ISSN:1662-5161

The widespread adoption of digital health technologies such as smartphone-based mobile applications, wearable activity trackers and Internet of Things systems has rapidly enabled new opportunities for predictive health monitoring. Leveraging digital health tools to track parameters relevant to human health is particularly important for the older segments of the population as old age is associated with multimorbidity and higher care needs. In order to assess the potential of these digital health technologies to improve health outcomes, it is paramount to investigate which digitally measurable parameters can effectively improve health outcomes among the elderly population. Currently, there is a lack of systematic evidence on this topic due to the inherent heterogeneity of the digital health domain and the lack of clinical validation of both novel prototypes and marketed devices. For this reason, the aim of the current study is to synthesize and systematically analyse which digitally measurable data may be effectively collected through digital health devices to improve health outcomes for older people. Using a modified PICO process and PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) framework, we provide the results of a systematic review and subsequent meta-analysis of digitally measurable predictors of morbidity, hospitalization, and mortality among older adults aged 65 or older. These findings can inform both technology developers and clinicians involved in the design, development and clinical implementation of digital health technologies for elderly citizens., Frontiers in Digital Health, 2, ISSN:2673-253X

Multisite medical data sharing is critical in modern clinical practice and medical research. The challenge is to conduct data sharing that preserves individual privacy and data utility. The shortcomings of traditional privacy-enhancing technologies mean that institutions rely upon bespoke data sharing contracts. The lengthy process and administration induced by these contracts increases the inefficiency of data sharing and may disincentivize important clinical treatment and medical research. This paper provides a synthesis between 2 novel advanced privacy-enhancing technologies—homomorphic encryption and secure multiparty computation (defined together as multiparty homomorphic encryption). These privacy-enhancing technologies provide a mathematical guarantee of privacy, with multiparty homomorphic encryption providing a performance advantage over separately using homomorphic encryption or secure multiparty computation. We argue multiparty homomorphic encryption fulfills legal requirements for medical data sharing under the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation which has set a global benchmark for data protection. Specifically, the data processed and shared using multiparty homomorphic encryption can be considered anonymized data. We explain how multiparty homomorphic encryption can reduce the reliance upon customized contractual measures between institutions. The proposed approach can accelerate the pace of medical research while offering additional incentives for health care and research institutes to employ common data interoperability standards., Journal of Medical Internet Research, 23 (2), ISSN:1438-8871

Data collection and processing via digital public health technologies are being promoted worldwide by governments and private companies as strategic remedies for mitigating the COVID-19 pandemic and loosening lockdown measures. However, the ethical and legal boundaries of deploying digital tools for disease surveillance and control purposes are unclear, and a rapidly evolving debate has emerged globally around the promises and risks of mobilizing digital tools for public health. To help scientists and policymakers navigate technological and ethical uncertainty, we present a typology of the primary digital public health applications currently in use. Namely: proximity and contact tracing, symptom monitoring, quarantine control, and flow modeling. For each, we discuss context-specific risks, cross-sectional issues, and ethical concerns. Finally, in recognition of the need for practical guidance, we propose a navigation aid for policymakers made up of ten steps for the ethical use of digital public health tools., 14 pages, 3 figures

The implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) raises a series of challenges for scientific research, in particular for research that is dependent on data. This study comprehensively investigates the promises and challenges associated with the implementation of the GDPR in the scientific domain, with a special focus on the impact of the new rights and obligations enshrined in the GDPR on the design and conduct of scientific research. Furthermore, the study examines the adequacy of the GDPR's derogations for scientific research in terms of safeguarding scientific freedom and technological progress. The study also provides policy options that delineate a pathway towards enhancing rather than stifling research, and facilitating privacy-preserving data-driven research under the provisions of the GDPR.