Ethical oversight of AI-driven paediatric trials: a proactive, risk-sensitive interim review model

Background Artificial intelligence (AI)-driven paediatric trials pose novel challenges for institutional review boards (IRBs), as traditional annual continuing review frameworks are often inadequate for evolving algorithmic and data-related risks. International and national regulations provide only limited guidance on how to design proactive, risk-sensitive interim oversight mechanisms for such research. Objective To develop and illustrate a risk-sensitive interim review model that strengthens participant protection and procedural fairness in AI-enabled paediatric research. Methods A conceptual normative analysis was conducted, integrating four ethical principles—protection, proportionality, respect for autonomy and assent, and procedural justice—with international guidelines [International Conference on Harmonisation–Good Clinical Practice ICH-GCP, Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS), and the Declaration of Helsinki] and Taiwanese regulations. From this synthesis, a five-component proactive interim review model was developed. To illustrate the model's practical application and feasibility, a Taiwanese IRB-mandated interim review of an AI-assisted pediatric speech-therapy trial ( n = 100, aged 3-7 years) is presented as a worked example rather than empirical data collection. Results The model comprises five interlocking components: (1) scheduled, risk-based interim reviews and audits; (2) structured deviation-triggered response procedures; (3) mechanisms for re-consent and ongoing communication; (4) continuous ethics and protocol training; and (5) transparent, auditable documentation and IRB-investigator communication. Application of the proposed model to the Taiwanese worked example illustrates how a structured, risk-sensitive interim review process can support the identification of informed-consent and eligibility-screening deviations, facilitate targeted corrective training, and promote routine documentation monitoring. Conclusions A proactive, risk-sensitive interim review model can support IRBs in shifting from reactive annual oversight to continuous, adaptive governance aligned with AI-specific risk profiles. The model offers a transferable, principle-based template for strengthening ethical oversight of AI-driven pediatric trials across diverse regulatory and cultural settings.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Frontiers in Digital Health
Published
2026-03-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3389/fdgth.2026.1782692
Primary Topic
Ethics in Clinical Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Ethical oversight of AI-driven paediatric trials: a proactive, risk-sensitive interim review model

T. Hsu, Chih-Shung Wong
Frontiers in Digital Health
Ethics in Clinical Research
article

Ethical oversight of AI-driven paediatric trials: a proactive, risk-sensitive interim review model

T. Hsu, Chih-Shung Wong
article en

Abstract

Background Artificial intelligence (AI)-driven paediatric trials pose novel challenges for institutional review boards (IRBs), as traditional annual continuing review frameworks are often inadequate for evolving algorithmic and data-related risks. International and national regulations provide only limited guidance on how to design proactive, risk-sensitive interim oversight mechanisms for such research. Objective To develop and illustrate a risk-sensitive interim review model that strengthens participant protection and procedural fairness in AI-enabled paediatric research. Methods A conceptual normative analysis was conducted, integrating four ethical principles—protection, proportionality, respect for autonomy and assent, and procedural justice—with international guidelines [International Conference on Harmonisation–Good Clinical Practice ICH-GCP, Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS), and the Declaration of Helsinki] and Taiwanese regulations. From this synthesis, a five-component proactive interim review model was developed. To illustrate the model's practical application and feasibility, a Taiwanese IRB-mandated interim review of an AI-assisted pediatric speech-therapy trial ( n = 100, aged 3-7 years) is presented as a worked example rather than empirical data collection. Results The model comprises five interlocking components: (1) scheduled, risk-based interim reviews and audits; (2) structured deviation-triggered response procedures; (3) mechanisms for re-consent and ongoing communication; (4) continuous ethics and protocol training; and (5) transparent, auditable documentation and IRB-investigator communication. Application of the proposed model to the Taiwanese worked example illustrates how a structured, risk-sensitive interim review process can support the identification of informed-consent and eligibility-screening deviations, facilitate targeted corrective training, and promote routine documentation monitoring. Conclusions A proactive, risk-sensitive interim review model can support IRBs in shifting from reactive annual oversight to continuous, adaptive governance aligned with AI-specific risk profiles. The model offers a transferable, principle-based template for strengthening ethical oversight of AI-driven pediatric trials across diverse regulatory and cultural settings.

Frontiers in Digital HealthVol. 8
Yuanpei University (TW), Cathay General Hospital (TW), Chang Jung Christian University (TW)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Ethics in Clinical Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.