Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: Journal of Medical Internet Research

Date Submitted: Apr 24, 2024
Date Accepted: Jul 5, 2024

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Authors' Reply: Commentary on “Protecting User Privacy and Rights in Academic Data-Sharing Partnerships: Principles From a Pilot Program at Crisis Text Line”

Pisani AR, Gallo C, Gould MS, Kanuri N, Marcotte JE, Pascal B, Ranney ML, Rousseau D, Turner S

Authors' Reply: Commentary on “Protecting User Privacy and Rights in Academic Data-Sharing Partnerships: Principles From a Pilot Program at Crisis Text Line”

J Med Internet Res 2025;27:e59734

DOI: 10.2196/59734

PMID: 39842004

PMCID: 11799806

Science and Ethics Advance Through Publication, Critique, and Refinement: Author Reply to Commentary Five Years After Publication

  • Anthony R. Pisani; 
  • Carlos Gallo; 
  • Madelyn S Gould; 
  • Nitya Kanuri; 
  • John E Marcotte; 
  • Brian Pascal; 
  • Megan L Ranney; 
  • David Rousseau; 
  • Shairi Turner

ABSTRACT

We appreciate Reierson's thoughtful commentary on our 2019 paper, which described our experiences, ethical process, judgment calls, and lessons from a 2016-17 data sharing pilot between Crisis Text Line (CTL) and academic researchers. The commentary raises important questions about the ethical conduct of health research in the digital age, particularly regarding informed consent, potential conflicts of interest, and the protection of vulnerable populations. Our article focused specifically on the noncommercial use of CTL data for research purposes, so we restrict our reply to points relevant to such usage. While we acknowledge the limitations of CTL's Terms of Service as a means of informing users about data sharing for research, we maintain that our guidelines were ethically sound and aligned with well-established practices for IRB review and researcher training. We emphasize the critical role of IRBs in ensuring that research involving vulnerable populations, including minors, is conducted ethically and with appropriate safeguards. Regarding potential conflicts of interest, we argue that unpaid non-fiduciary advisory board service does not constitute a conflict requiring disclosure. The transparent nature of our collaboration with CTL, as evidenced by the authorship and acknowledgments in our paper, further underscores our commitment to ethical research practices. We recognize the complexity and evolving nature of the challenges surrounding data-sharing partnerships in digital health research. As the field progresses, we remain committed to ongoing, transparent engagement and to refining best practices in collaboration with colleagues, stakeholders, and the public. Our response aims to provide clarity and context for the concerns raised in the commentary while reaffirming the integrity and value of our original work. Ultimately, we maintain that our paper contributed meaningfully to the ongoing discourse on ethical data sharing and laid the groundwork for future improvements in this critical area of digital health research.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Pisani AR, Gallo C, Gould MS, Kanuri N, Marcotte JE, Pascal B, Ranney ML, Rousseau D, Turner S

Authors' Reply: Commentary on “Protecting User Privacy and Rights in Academic Data-Sharing Partnerships: Principles From a Pilot Program at Crisis Text Line”

J Med Internet Res 2025;27:e59734

DOI: 10.2196/59734

PMID: 39842004

PMCID: 11799806

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.