Data science is an emerging field that provides new analytical methods. It incorporates novel data sources (eg, internet data) and methods (eg, machine learning) that offer valuable and timely insights into public health issues, including injury and violence prevention. The objective of this research was to describe ethical considerations for public health data scientists conducting injury and violence prevention-related data science projects to prevent unintended ethical, legal, and social consequences, such as loss of privacy or loss of public trust. We first reviewed foundational bioethics and public health ethics literature to identify key ethical concepts relevant to public health data science. After identifying these ethics concepts, we held a series of discussions to organize them under broad ethical domains. Within each domain, we examined relevant ethics concepts from our review of the primary literature. Lastly, we developed questions for each ethical domain to facilitate the early conceptualization stage of the ethical analysis of injury and violence prevention projects. We identified 4 ethical domains: privacy, responsible stewardship, justice as fairness, and inclusivity and engagement. We determined that each domain carries equal weight, with no consideration bearing more importance than the others. Examples of ethical considerations are clearly identifying project goals, determining whether people included in projects are at risk of reidentification through external sources or linkages, and evaluating and minimizing the potential for bias in data sources used. As data science methodologies are incorporated into public health research to work toward reducing the effect of injury and violence on individuals, families, and communities in the United States, we recommend that relevant ethical issues be identified, considered, and addressed.

Introduction: Falls and motor-vehicle crashes (MVCs) are leading causes of unintentional injury deaths among older adults (65+) in the United States. Injury prevention resources exist to help healthcare providers reduce fall and MVC risk among older adult patients. However, awareness of these resources among healthcare providers is unclear. Methods: Questions were included in the 2019 DocStyles survey that assessed healthcare provider awareness of three injury prevention resources: (1) the American Geriatrics Society's (AGS's) Clinician's Guide to Assessing and Counseling Older Drivers, (2) the Clinical Assessment of Driving Related Skills (CADReS), and (3) the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) Stopping Elderly Accidents, Deaths, and Injuries (STEADI) initiative. We also explored the circumstances and current practices for counseling older adult patients on fall prevention and driving safety. Results: Only 20% of providers reported awareness of any of the injury prevention resources. Providers were more likely to report either screening for fall risk or unsafe driving when an older adult presented with a fall concern (74.5%) or driving concern or recent crash (85.1%), compared to annual screening for fall risk (67.7%) or driving safety (47.7%). More providers reported discussing the increased fall or MVC risk associated with patient medications, referring patient for driving fitness evaluations, or discussing alternative transportation options with the patient after adverse events or patient-initiated concerns compared to routine annual discussions. Conclusion: Healthcare gaps persist in the screening and assessment of older adult risk factors for falls and unsafe driving. Limited provider awareness of clinical resources related to preventing older adult falls and unsafe driving may be contributing to these healthcare gaps. Practical Applications: Improving healthcare provider awareness of these resources could help them identify older adults at risk of a fall or MVC and promote injury prevention efforts in their clinical practices. © 2023 National Safety Council and Elsevier Ltd

Introduction: During the COVID-19 pandemic, one study in Australia showed an increase in drowning deaths in certain settings, while a study in China showed a decrease in drowning deaths. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on drowning deaths in the United States is unknown. Objective: To report on unintentional drowning deaths among U.S. persons aged ≤29 years by demographic characteristics and compare 2020 fatal drowning rates with rates from 2010 to 2019. Methods: Data from CDC WONDER were analyzed to calculate unintentional drowning death rates among persons aged ≤29 years by age group, sex, race/ethnicity, and location of drowning. These rates were compared to drowning death rates for the previous 10 years (2010–2019). Results: In 2020, 1.26 per 100,000 persons aged ≤29 years died from unintentional drowning, a 16.79% increase from 2019. Drowning death rates decreased 1.81% per year on average (95% CI: −3.02%, −0.59%) from 2010 to 2019. The largest increases in unintentional drowning deaths from 2019 to 2020 occurred among young adults aged 20 to 24 years (44.12%), Black or African American persons (23.73%), and males (19.55%). The location with the largest increase in drowning was natural water (26.44%). Conclusion: Drowning death rates among persons aged ≤29 years significantly increased from 2019 to 2020. Further research is needed to understand the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on drowning and identify how drowning prevention strategies can be adapted and strengthened. Practical applications: Drowning remains a leading cause of injury death among persons aged ≤29 years. However, drowning is preventable. Interventions such as learning basic swimming and water safety skills, and consistent use of lifejackets on boats and among weaker swimmers in natural water, have the potential to reduce drowning deaths. Developing strategies that ensure equitable access to these interventions may prevent future drowning. © 2022 National Safety Council and Elsevier Ltd

Introduction: Public health investigations, including research, in refugee populations are necessary to inform evidence-based interventions and care. The unique challenges refugees face (displacement, limited political protections, economic hardship) can make them especially vulnerable to harm, burden, or undue influence. Acute survival needs, fear of stigma or persecution, and history of trauma may present challenges to ensuring meaningful informed consent and establishing trust. We examined the recently published literature to understand the application of ethics principles in investigations involving refugees. Methods: We conducted a preliminary review of refugee health literature (research and non-research data collections) published from 2015 through 2018 available in PubMed. Article inclusion criteria were: participants were refugees, topic was health-related, and methods used primary data collection. Information regarding type of investigation, methods, and reported ethics considerations was abstracted. Results: We examined 288 articles. Results indicated 33% of investigations were conducted before resettlement, during the displacement period (68% of these were in refugee camps). Common topics included mental health (48%) and healthcare access (8%). The majority (87%) of investigations obtained consent. Incentives were provided less frequently (23%). Most authors discussed the ways in which community stakeholders were engaged (91%), yet few noted whether refugee representatives had an opportunity to review investigational protocols (8%). Cultural considerations were generally limited to gender and religious norms, and 13% mentioned providing some form of post-investigation support. Conclusions: Our analysis is a preliminary assessment of the application of ethics principles reported within the recently published refugee health literature. From this analysis, we have proposed a list of best practices, which include stakeholder engagement, respect for cultural norms, and post-study support. Investigations conducted among refugees require additional diligence to ensure respect for and welfare of the participants. Development of a refugee-specific ethics framework with ethics and refugee health experts that addresses the need for stakeholder involvement, appropriate incentive use, protocol review, and considerations of cultural practices may help guide future investigations in this population.

BACKGROUND: Recognizing the importance of having a broad exploration of how cultural perspectives may shape thinking about ethical considerations, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) funded four regional meetings in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Eastern Mediterranean to explore these perspectives relevant to pandemic influenza preparedness and response. The meetings were attended by 168 health professionals, scientists, academics, ethicists, religious leaders, and other community members representing 40 countries in these regions. METHODS: We reviewed the meeting reports, notes and stories and mapped outcomes to the key ethical challenges for pandemic influenza response described in the World Health Organization's (WHO's) guidance, Ethical Considerations in Developing a Public Health Response to Pandemic Influenza: transparency and public engagement, allocation of resources, social distancing, obligations to and of healthcare workers, and international collaboration. RESULTS: The important role of transparency and public engagement were widely accepted among participants. However, there was general agreement that no "one size fits all" approach to allocating resources can address the variety of economic, cultural and other contextual factors that must be taken into account. The importance of social distancing as a tool to limit disease transmission was also recognized, but the difficulties associated with this measure were acknowledged. There was agreement that healthcare workers often have competing obligations and that government has a responsibility to assist healthcare workers in doing their job by providing appropriate training and equipment. Finally, there was agreement about the importance of international collaboration for combating global health threats. CONCLUSION: Although some cultural differences in the values that frame pandemic preparedness and response efforts were observed, participants generally agreed on the key ethical principles discussed in the WHO's guidance. Most significantly the input gathered from these regional meetings pointed to the important role that procedural ethics can play in bringing people and countries together to respond to the shared health threat posed by a pandemic influenza despite the existence of cultural differences.

The Ebola virus disease (Ebola) outbreak in West Africa (2014-2015) prompted domestic planning to address the scenario in which a traveler imports Ebola into the United States. Parental presence at the bedside of a child with suspected or confirmed Ebola emerged as a challenging issue for pediatric health care providers and public health practitioners. At the heart of the issue was the balance of family-centered care and appropriate infection control, which are not easily aligned in the setting of Ebola. In the following dialogue, pediatricians, who participated in discussions about parental presence during the evaluation of pediatric persons under investigation, and a public health ethicist discuss the interplay between family-centered care and appropriate infection control. Reaching a balance between the 2 ideals is difficult and may require the facility and providers to engage in a deliberate conversation to determine how they will handle parental presence for such high-risk scenarios, including Ebola and other high-consequence pathogens, in their institution. © 2016 Elsevier Inc.

There is growing support for making research data widely available to accelerate the pace of scientific discovery, foster cross-sectoral collaboration, and ultimately enhance the translation of science to clinical and public health practice.1, 2, 3 Towards that goal, major funders of health research have recently launched a joint statement committing to increase the availability of public health research data in ways that are equitable, ethical, and efficient.4 We would like to draw attention to an additional, less widely recognised, yet important benefit of data sharing in the area of public health: education and professional development. | Population-based research is time-consuming and resource-intensive, usually requiring multipartner and cross-sectoral engagements. Graduate students in the area of public health are often unable to do research on their own or within the setting of a smaller research community or laboratory. Yet understanding and analysis of population-based research data is a pivotal component of both graduate training and completion of a master's or doctoral thesis. The inherent richness of population-based research data, its usefulness for analysis through various lenses and points in time, and a natural desire for epidemiology to seek actionable information (ie, information translatable into interventions) justify the greater attention given to the secondary use of data and its fundamental role in public health research and education.