Academic Journal
FORETHICS: From Principles to Operational Decisions in Forensic Research.
| Title: | FORETHICS: From Principles to Operational Decisions in Forensic Research. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Nioi, Matteo, Chighine, Alberto, d'Aloja, Ernesto |
| Source: | Forensic Sciences; Sep2026, Vol. 6 Issue 3, p77, 21p |
| Subject Terms: | Ethical decision making, Decision support systems, Research ethics, Ethical problems, Decision making |
| Abstract: | Forensic research may involve living persons, deceased persons, human tissues, genetic data, records and images, judicial exhibits, animals, and artificial-intelligence systems. Although existing ethical instruments establish essential principles, they provide limited operational guidance for determining what must be authorised, protected, and documented before a specific study begins. FORETHICS was developed through a normative functional analysis of internationally recognised ethical instruments and selected forensic literature. Requirements were organised according to the governance function performed and examined across object-specific research scenarios. The resulting framework translates general principles into a common decision grammar comprising five foundational components, seven independent ethical axes, eight object-specific modules, cross-cutting modifiers, fifteen Hard Stops, a ten-gate decision pathway, and ten study-specific Decision Cards. Its Core Rule requires every project to establish who lawfully controls access for the proposed use, why the research is scientifically necessary, which safeguards are required, and what minimum documentation demonstrates decision readiness. The ethical object assessed is therefore the proposed research use rather than the specimen, record, or dataset in isolation. FORETHICS does not replace national law, ethical review, judicial authority, data-protection assessment, or animal-welfare oversight. It provides a candidate architecture for making forensic research governance more explicit, traceable, and comparable across jurisdictions while preserving locally lawful pathways. The framework has undergone internal scenario-based examination but has not yet been externally or empirically validated. Multidisciplinary consensus, inter-rater testing, cross-jurisdictional evaluation, and prospective usability studies are therefore required before implementation as an international decision-support standard. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Forensic Sciences is the property of MDPI and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Complementary Index |
| FullText | Text: Availability: 0 |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: edb DbLabel: Complementary Index An: 197450305 RelevancyScore: 1082 AccessLevel: 6 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 1082.42749023438 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: FORETHICS: From Principles to Operational Decisions in Forensic Research. – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Nioi%2C+Matteo%22">Nioi, Matteo</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Chighine%2C+Alberto%22">Chighine, Alberto</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22d'Aloja%2C+Ernesto%22">d'Aloja, Ernesto</searchLink> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: Forensic Sciences; Sep2026, Vol. 6 Issue 3, p77, 21p – Name: Subject Label: Subject Terms Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Ethical+decision+making%22">Ethical decision making</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Decision+support+systems%22">Decision support systems</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Research+ethics%22">Research ethics</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Ethical+problems%22">Ethical problems</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Decision+making%22">Decision making</searchLink> – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: Forensic research may involve living persons, deceased persons, human tissues, genetic data, records and images, judicial exhibits, animals, and artificial-intelligence systems. Although existing ethical instruments establish essential principles, they provide limited operational guidance for determining what must be authorised, protected, and documented before a specific study begins. FORETHICS was developed through a normative functional analysis of internationally recognised ethical instruments and selected forensic literature. Requirements were organised according to the governance function performed and examined across object-specific research scenarios. The resulting framework translates general principles into a common decision grammar comprising five foundational components, seven independent ethical axes, eight object-specific modules, cross-cutting modifiers, fifteen Hard Stops, a ten-gate decision pathway, and ten study-specific Decision Cards. Its Core Rule requires every project to establish who lawfully controls access for the proposed use, why the research is scientifically necessary, which safeguards are required, and what minimum documentation demonstrates decision readiness. The ethical object assessed is therefore the proposed research use rather than the specimen, record, or dataset in isolation. FORETHICS does not replace national law, ethical review, judicial authority, data-protection assessment, or animal-welfare oversight. It provides a candidate architecture for making forensic research governance more explicit, traceable, and comparable across jurisdictions while preserving locally lawful pathways. The framework has undergone internal scenario-based examination but has not yet been externally or empirically validated. Multidisciplinary consensus, inter-rater testing, cross-jurisdictional evaluation, and prospective usability studies are therefore required before implementation as an international decision-support standard. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] – Name: Abstract Label: Group: Ab Data: <i>Copyright of Forensic Sciences is the property of MDPI and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edb&AN=197450305 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.3390/forensicsci6030077 Languages: – Code: eng Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 21 StartPage: 77 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Ethical decision making Type: general – SubjectFull: Decision support systems Type: general – SubjectFull: Research ethics Type: general – SubjectFull: Ethical problems Type: general – SubjectFull: Decision making Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: FORETHICS: From Principles to Operational Decisions in Forensic Research. Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Nioi, Matteo – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Chighine, Alberto – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: d'Aloja, Ernesto IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 09 Text: Sep2026 Type: published Y: 2026 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 26736756 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 6 – Type: issue Value: 3 Titles: – TitleFull: Forensic Sciences Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |