ABSTRACT
Background Advances in genetics and digital phenotyping in psychiatry have given rise to testing services targeting young people, which claim to predict psychiatric outcomes before difficulties emerge. These services raise several ethical challenges surrounding data sharing and information privacy.
Objectives This study aimed to investigate young people’s interest in predictive testing for mental health challenges, and their attitudes towards sharing biological, psychosocial and digital data for such purpose.
Methods Eighty UK adolescents aged 16-18 participated in the study. Participants took part in a digital role-play where they played the role of clients of a fictional predictive psychiatry company and chose what sources of personal data they wished to provide for a risk assessment. After the role-play, participants reflected upon their choices during a peer-led interview.
Findings Participants saw multiple benefits in predictive testing services, but were highly selective with regards to type the data they were willing to share. Largely due to privacy concerns, digital data sources such as social media or Google search history were less likely to be shared than psychosocial and biological data, including school grades and one’s DNA. Participants were particularly reluctant to share digital data with schools (but less so with health systems).
Conclusions Emerging predictive psychiatric services are valued by young people; however, these services must consider privacy vs. utility trade-offs from the perspective of different stakeholders, including adolescents.
Clinical implications Respecting adolescents’ need for transparency, privacy and choice in the age of digital phenotyping is critical to the responsible implementation of predictive psychiatric services.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Protocols
Funding Statement
IS, GP and JL are supported by a Wellcome Trust Senior Investigator Award to IS (Grant 104825/Z/14/Z). IS is, in addition, supported by the NIHR Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre under Grant IS-BRC-1215-20005 and the Wellcome Centre for Ethics and Humanities, which is supported by core funding from the Wellcome Trust under Grant 203132/Z/16/Z. The project was made possible by the Junior Researcher Programme (http://jrp.pscholars.org/).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethics approval was granted by the University of Oxford Medical Sciences Interdivisional Research Ethics Committee (Ref: R38020/RE001).
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
gabriela.pavarini{at}psych.ox.ac.uk
