Parenting Journal · Volume 2 · Issue 5 · Licensed source edition
Ethical oversight of AI-driven paediatric trials: a proactive, risk-sensitive interim review model
Originally published 2026-03-27 · Frontiers in Digital Health
Frontiers Media SA · DOI 10.3389/fdgth.2026.1782692 ↗
AI / system type
AI pediatric-trial governance proposal; no model or outcome trial
Family implicationsDesign, ethics, stakeholder or technical evidence with child/family implications; household benefits are not assumed.
The AI connection
The article develops oversight specifically for evolving AI-enabled pediatric trials.
Why this reading matters
Highlights children’s continuing rights during adaptive research rather than treating an initial signature as sufficient.
Editorial reading guide · Respect
What should happen if an AI study changes after our child has enrolled?
The framework treats permission and assent as ongoing responsibilities when AI-related risks or procedures change. Its scheduled reviews, deviation responses, and re-consent proposals make continuing respect visible after a family first signs up.
Study context
The author synthesizes ethical principles, international guidance, and Taiwanese regulation, illustrating the proposal with an IRB speech-therapy example described as nonempirical.
Age / stage: Pediatric AI research; worked example describes speech therapy ages 3–7
Read with three questions
- Which changes would justify renewed communication or consent?
- How could interim review respond to eligibility or consent deviations?
- Why is the worked example not evidence that the framework protects participants?
Keep the limits in view
This is an ethical model, not a protocol or empirical trial evaluation. The illustrative hundred-child example does not validate effectiveness, and smaller review boards may lack the resources or legal context needed for the full approach.
The text below is the original article’s licensed repository edition. Its wording is not rewritten. Use the Paper Agent beside the text to locate evidence; open the source for figures, tables and complete context.
Opening the verified paper and agent…
Checking the article identity, license record, and saved source text.
Open the repository recordAttribution & reuse
Follow the original.
Original authorship, publication date, journal and DOI are preserved. This issue’s TRICK placement and reading questions are editorial additions, not claims made by the original authors.
Chih-Shung Wong; Tsui-Wen Hsu (2026). Ethical oversight of AI-driven paediatric trials: a proactive, risk-sensitive interim review model Frontiers in Digital Health. https://doi.org/10.3389/fdgth.2026.1782692
Permissions checked against the saved article notice; repository publication notices screened 2026-11-04. This is not a new peer-review decision. The source authors and publishers are not represented as endorsing this issue.