University of Leicester
Browse

Mental health, big data and research ethics: Parity of esteem in mental health research from a UK perspective

Download (308.58 kB)
journal contribution
posted on 2019-08-05, 13:26 authored by Julie Morton, Michelle O'Reilly
Central to ethical debates in contemporary mental health research are the rhetoric of parity of esteem, challenges underpinned by the social construct of vulnerability and the tendency to homogenise the population diagnosed with mental health conditions. Such ethical dimensions are further complicated by the contemporary endeavour to work with ‘big data’ which has led to ambitious claims for discovery and knowledge. Research in mental health is challenging due to the perceived constraints of ethical principles such as the protection of autonomy, consent, risk and harms. This article discusses how ethical considerations need to be reconceptualised when using big data sets. The argument is foregrounded with an appraisal of the prevailing political discourse of parity of esteem demonstrating that ongoing disparities in services and research should also be considered when inquiry uses big data.

History

Citation

Clinical Ethics, 2019, Volume: 14 issue: 4, page(s): 165-172

Author affiliation

/Organisation/COLLEGE OF SOCIAL SCIENCES, ARTS AND HUMANITIES/Department of Media, Communication and Sociology

Version

  • AM (Accepted Manuscript)

Published in

Clinical Ethics

Volume

14

Issue

4

Pagination

165-172

Publisher

SAGE Publications (UK and US)

issn

1477-7509

Acceptance date

2019-07-22

Copyright date

2019

Available date

2019-10-01

Notes

The file associated with this record is under embargo until publication, in accordance with the publisher's self-archiving policy. The full text may be available through the publisher links provided above.

Language

en

Usage metrics

    University of Leicester Publications

    Categories

    No categories selected

    Exports

    RefWorks
    BibTeX
    Ref. manager
    Endnote
    DataCite
    NLM
    DC