Abstract
Introduction The use of drones in environment and health research is a relatively new phenomenon. A principal research activity drones are used for is environmental monitoring, which can raise concerns in local communities. Existing ethical guidance for researchers is often not specific to drone technology and practices vary between research settings. Therefore, this scoping review aims to gather the evidence available on how the use of drones is perceived by local communities, as well as current research practices, and ethical guidance related to drone deployment.
Methods and analysis This scoping review will follow the PRISMA-ScR and the Joana Briggs Institute guidelines. The literature search will be conducted using academic databases and grey literature sources. After pilot testing the inclusion criteria and data extraction tool, two researchers will double-screen and then chart available evidence independently. A content analysis will be carried out to identify patterns of categories or terms used to describe ethical considerations related to drone usage for environmental monitoring in the literature using the R Package RQDA. Discrepancies in any phase of the project are solved through consensus.
Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval is not required; only secondary data will be used. This protocol is registered on the Open Science Framework (osf.io/a78et). The results will be disseminated through publication in a scientific journal and will be used to inform drone field campaigns in the Wellcome Trust funded HARMONIZE project. HARMONIZE aims to develop cost-effective and reproducible digital infrastructure for stakeholders in climate change hotspots in Latin America & the Caribbean and will use drone technology to collect data on fine scale landscape changes.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
RL is the principal investigator of the Wellcome Trust (https://wellcome.org/) funded HARMONIZE project. The project award reference is 224694/Z/21/Z. The funders had no role in the study design.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
No ethics approval was required for this study since only secondary data will be used.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
(remy.hoekspaans{at}bsc.es)
(bruna.drumond{at}icict.fiocruz.br)
(kim.vandaalen{at}bsc.es)
(Alison.Derbyshire{at}lstmed.ac.uk)
(adriano.silva{at}fiocruz.br)
(raquel.lana{at}bsc.es)
(om.santos{at}uniandes.edu.co)
(gabriel.carrasco{at}upch.pe)
(claudia.codeco{at}fiocruz.br)
(rachel.lowe{at}bsc.es)
Data Availability
No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study. All relevant data from this study will be made available upon study completion.
