Dataset Information

A best-worst scaling experiment to prioritize concern about ethical issues in citizen science reveals heterogeneity on people-level v. data-level issues.

ABSTRACT: "Citizen science" refers to the participation of lay individuals in scientific studies and other activities having scientific objectives. Citizen science gives rise to unique ethical issues that stem from the potentially multifaceted contributions of citizen scientists to the research process. We sought to explore the ethical issues that are most concerning to citizen scientist practitioners, participants, and scholars to support ethical practices in citizen science. We developed a best-worst scaling experiment using a balanced incomplete block design and fielded it with respondents recruited through the U.S.-based Citizen Science Association. Respondents were shown repeated subsets of 11 ethical issues and identified the most and least concerning issues in each subset. Latent class analysis revealed two respondent classes. The "Power to the People" class was most concerned about power imbalance between project leaders and participants, exploitation of participants, and lack of diverse participation. The "Show Me the Data" class was most concerned about the quality of data generated by citizen science projects and failure of projects to share data and other research outputs.

SUBMITTER: Guerrini CJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8476613 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A best-worst scaling experiment to prioritize concern about ethical issues in citizen science reveals heterogeneity on people-level v. data-level issues.

Guerrini Christi J CJ Crossnohere Norah L NL Rasmussen Lisa L Bridges John F P JFP

Scientific reports 20210927 1

"Citizen science" refers to the participation of lay individuals in scientific studies and other activities having scientific objectives. Citizen science gives rise to unique ethical issues that stem from the potentially multifaceted contributions of citizen scientists to the research process. We sought to explore the ethical issues that are most concerning to citizen scientist practitioners, participants, and scholars to support ethical practices in citizen science. We developed a best-worst sc ...[more]

PMID: 34580327

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundConsumers' access to cannabis has been considerably expanded in US states where recreational cannabis was legalized and commercialized. However, little is known about the important factors influencing consumers' purchase decisions in cannabis retail dispensaries. This study examined cannabis users' perceptions of the relative importance of policy-relevant factors when they made cannabis purchase decisions.MethodsAn online survey was administered to 817 adult cannabis users in seven states in the US (California, Colorado, Maine, Massachusetts, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington) that had approved cannabis commercialization by the time of interview in January 2018. Twenty policy-relevant cannabis attributes were evaluated, including those pertaining to product characteristics, quality, package characteristics, price and free sample, store characteristics, and restrictions on use. A best-worst scaling experiment was employed, which asked respondents to select the most and the least important attributes in a choice scenario. Each respondent answered 10 choice scenarios, each including a random combination of four attributes out of the 20. The relative importance of each attribute was evaluated using hierarchical Bayesian estimation of mixed logit models.ResultsOverall, 'quality', 'strain type', 'price', 'THC' (tetrahydrocannabinol) and 'pesticide' were the top five important attributes affecting cannabis users' willingness to buy cannabis in a dispensary. These five attributes jointly accounted for approximately half of the total importance. In subsample analysis, both recreational and dual-purpose users attached higher importance to 'quality', 'THC', and 'price', whereas medical users tended to think 'CBD' (cannabidiol) and 'pesticide' were more important. All cannabis users perceived 'package' to be the least important attribute. Gender had no major differences in perceptions.ConclusionsCannabis users in general perceived product characteristics, quality, and price to be important factors in their willingness to buy cannabis in dispensaries. There were heterogeneities in the perceptions by cannabis use purposes. The findings might deserve consideration in cannabis policy design.

Project description:BackgroundCommunity behavioral health clinicians, supervisors, and administrators play an essential role in implementing new psychosocial evidence-based practices (EBP) for patients receiving psychiatric care; however, little is known about these stakeholders' values and preferences for implementation strategies that support EBP use, nor how best to elicit, quantify, or segment their preferences. This study sought to quantify these stakeholders' preferences for implementation strategies and to identify segments of stakeholders with distinct preferences using a rigorous choice experiment method called best-worst scaling.MethodsA total of 240 clinicians, 74 clinical supervisors, and 29 administrators employed within clinics delivering publicly-funded behavioral health services in a large metropolitan behavioral health system participated in a best-worst scaling choice experiment. Participants evaluated 14 implementation strategies developed through extensive elicitation and pilot work within the target system. Preference weights were generated for each strategy using hierarchical Bayesian estimation. Latent class analysis identified segments of stakeholders with unique preference profiles.ResultsOn average, stakeholders preferred two strategies significantly more than all others-compensation for use of EBP per session and compensation for preparation time to use the EBP (P < .05); two strategies were preferred significantly less than all others-performance feedback via email and performance feedback via leaderboard (P < .05). However, latent class analysis identified four distinct segments of stakeholders with unique preferences: Segment 1 (n = 121, 35%) strongly preferred financial incentives over all other approaches and included more administrators; Segment 2 (n = 80, 23%) preferred technology-based strategies and was younger, on average; Segment 3 (n = 52, 15%) preferred an improved waiting room to enhance client readiness, strongly disliked any type of clinical consultation, and had the lowest participation in local EBP training initiatives; Segment 4 (n = 90, 26%) strongly preferred clinical consultation strategies and included more clinicians in substance use clinics.ConclusionsThe presence of four heterogeneous subpopulations within this large group of clinicians, supervisors, and administrators suggests optimal implementation may be achieved through targeted strategies derived via elicitation of stakeholder preferences. Best-worst scaling is a feasible and rigorous method for eliciting stakeholders' implementation preferences and identifying subpopulations with unique preferences in behavioral health settings.

Project description:ObjectiveThis article employs a best-worst scaling (BWS) experiment to identify the claims-based outcomes that matter most to patients and other relevant parties when evaluating pediatric antipsychotic monitoring programs in the United States.Data sourcesPatients and relevant parties, with pediatric antipsychotic oversight and treatment experience, completed a BWS experiment, including policymakers (n = 31), foster care alumni (n = 28), caseworkers (n = 23), prescribing clinicians (n = 32), and caregivers (n = 18).Study designRespondents received surveys with a scenario on antipsychotic monitoring programs and ranked 11 candidate claims-based outcomes as most and least important for program evaluation.Data analysisStratified by respondent group, best-worst scores were calculated to identify the relative importance of the claims-based outcomes. A conditional logit examined whether candidate outcomes for safety, quality, and unintended consequences were preferred over reduction in antipsychotic treatment, the outcome used most often to evaluate antipsychotic monitoring programs.Principal findingsSafety indicators (eg, antipsychotic co-pharmacy, cross-class polypharmacy, higher than recommended doses) ranked among the top three candidate outcomes across respondent groups and were an important complement to antipsychotic treatment reduction. Foster care alumni prioritized "antipsychotic treatment reduction" and "increased psychosocial treatment." Caseworkers, prescribers, and caregivers prioritized "increased follow-up after treatment initiation." Potential unintended consequences of an antipsychotic monitoring program ranked lowest, including increased use of other psychotropic medication classes (as a substitute), increased psychiatric hospital stays, and increased emergency room utilization. Results of the conditional logit model found only caregivers significantly preferred other indicators over antipsychotic treatment reduction, preferring improvements in follow-up care (5.78) and psychosocial treatment (4.53) and reduction in prescriptions of higher than recommended doses (3.64).ConclusionsThe BWS experiment supported rank ordering of candidate claims-based outcomes demonstrating the opportunity for future studies to align outcomes used in antipsychotic monitoring program evaluations with community preferences, specifically by diversifying metrics to include safety and quality indicators.

Dataset Information

A best-worst scaling experiment to prioritize concern about ethical issues in citizen science reveals heterogeneity on people-level v. data-level issues.

Publications

A best-worst scaling experiment to prioritize concern about ethical issues in citizen science reveals heterogeneity on people-level v. data-level issues.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets