About

Jon F. Merz, MBA, JD, PhD, is an Emeritus Associate Professor of Medical Ethics and Health Policy at the University of Pennsylvania's Perelman School of Medicine. He is affiliated with the Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy. His educational background includes a B.S. in Nuclear Engineering from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, an M.B.A. from the University of North Florida, a J.D. from Duquesne University School of Law, and a Ph.D. in Engineering & Public Policy from Carnegie Mellon University. Dr. Merz's professional focus is on medical ethics and health policy, with a particular emphasis on issues related to bioethics, the ethics of gene technology, patenting and licensing in biotechnology, and the voluntariness of consent in research. His contributions include empirical and conceptual analyses of ethical issues in biomedical research, as well as the ethical implications of commercial population genomics and gene patenting. He has authored numerous publications in these areas, advancing understanding of ethical standards and practices in biomedical research and policy.

Research topics

• Medicine
• Psychology
• Political science
• Family medicine
• Business

Selected publications

• Search for Light Dark Matter in Low-Energy Ionization Signals from XENONnT

  Physical Review Letters · 2025-04-25 · 18 citations

  articleOpen access

  We report on a blinded search for dark matter with single- and few-electron signals in the first science run of XENONnT relying on a novel detector response framework that is physics model dependent. We derive 90% confidence upper limits for dark matter-electron interactions. Heavy and light mediator cases are considered for the standard halo model and dark matter up-scattered in the Sun. We set stringent new limits on dark matter-electron scattering via a heavy mediator with a mass within 10-20 MeV/c^{2} and electron absorption of axionlike particles and dark photons for m_{χ} below 0.03 keV/c^{2}.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• First Search for Light Dark Matter in the Neutrino Fog with XENONnT

  Physical Review Letters · 2025-03-20 · 17 citations

  articleOpen access

  We search for dark matter (DM) with a mass [3,12] GeV/c^{2} using an exposure of 3.51 tonne year with the XENONnT experiment. We consider spin-independent DM-nucleon interactions mediated by a heavy or light mediator, spin-dependent DM-neutron interactions, momentum-dependent DM scattering, and mirror DM. Using a lowered energy threshold compared to the previous weakly interacting massive particle search, a blind analysis of [0.5, 5.0] keV nuclear recoil events reveals no significant signal excess over the background. XENONnT excludes spin-independent DM-nucleon cross sections >2.5×10^{-45} cm^{2} at 90% confidence level for 6 GeV/c^{2} DM. In the considered mass range, the DM sensitivity approaches the "neutrino fog," the limitation where neutrinos produce a signal that is indistinguishable from that of light DM-xenon nucleus scattering.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• XENONnT analysis: Signal reconstruction, calibration, and event selection

  Physical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2025-03-24 · 14 citations

  articleOpen access

  The XENONnT experiment, located at the INFN Laboratori Nazionali del Gran Sasso, Italy, features a 5.9 tonne liquid xenon time projection chamber surrounded by an instrumented neutron veto, all of which is housed within a muon veto water tank. Because of extensive shielding and advanced purification to mitigate natural radioactivity, an exceptionally low background level of <a:math xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><a:mrow><a:mo stretchy="false">(</a:mo><a:mn>15.8</a:mn><a:mo>±</a:mo><a:mn>1.3</a:mn><a:mo stretchy="false">)</a:mo><a:mtext> </a:mtext><a:mtext> </a:mtext><a:mi>events</a:mi><a:mo>/</a:mo><a:mo stretchy="false">(</a:mo><a:mi>tonne</a:mi><a:mo>·</a:mo><a:mi>year</a:mi><a:mo>·</a:mo><a:mi>keV</a:mi><a:mo stretchy="false">)</a:mo></a:mrow></a:math> in the (1,30) keV region is reached in the inner part of the time projection chamber. XENONnT is, thus, sensitive to a wide range of rare phenomena related to dark matter and neutrino interactions, both within and beyond the Standard Model of particle physics, with a focus on the direct detection of dark matter in the form of weakly interacting massive particles. From May 2021 to December 2021, XENONnT accumulated data in rare-event search mode with a total exposure of one <g:math xmlns:g="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><g:mrow><g:mi>tonne</g:mi><g:mo>·</g:mo><g:mi>year</g:mi></g:mrow></g:math>. This paper provides a detailed description of the signal reconstruction methods, event selection procedure, and detector response calibration, as well as an overview of the detector performance in this time frame. This work establishes the foundational framework for the “blind analysis” methodology we are using when reporting XENONnT physics results.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• What Is “Key Information”? Consideration of the Reasons People Do or Do Not Take Part in Research

  Ethics & Human Research · 2024-04-17

  articleOpen accessSenior author

  We performed a qualitative review of 50 consent forms posted on Clinicaltrials.gov, examining the content of key information sections. We found that key information disclosures are typically focused on procedures, risks, potential benefits, and alternatives. Drawing upon reviews of the large literature examining the reasons people do or do not take part in research, we propose that these disclosures should be based more directly on what we know to be the real reasons why people choose to take part or refuse participation. We propose key information language for consideration by researchers and institutional review boards.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• Who to engage in HIV vaccine trial benefit-sharing negotiations? An empirical proposition of a framework

  BMC Medical Ethics · 2024-05-14

  articleOpen accessSenior author

  BACKGROUND: A morally sound framework for benefit-sharing is crucial to minimize research exploitation for research conducted in developing countries. However, in practice, it remains uncertain which stakeholders should be involved in the decision-making process regarding benefit-sharing and what the implications might be. Therefore the study aimed to empirically propose a framework for benefit-sharing negotiations in research by taking HIV vaccine trials as a case. METHODS: The study was conducted in Tanzania using a case study design and qualitative approaches. Data were collected using in-depth interviews (IDI) and focus group discussions (FGD). A total of 37 study participants were selected purposively comprising institutional review board (IRB) members, researchers, community advisory board (CAB) members, a policymaker, and HIV/AIDS advocates. Deductive and inductive thematic analysis approaches were deployed to analyze collected data with the aid of MAXQDA version 20.4.0 software. RESULTS: The findings indicate a triangular relationship between the research community, researched community and intermediaries. However, the relationship ought to take into consideration the timing of negotiations, the level of understanding between parties and the phase of the clinical trial. The proposed framework operationalize partnership interactions in community-based participatory research. CONCLUSION: In the context of this study, the suggested framework incorporates the research community, the community being researched, and intermediary parties. The framework would guarantee well-informed and inclusive decision-making regarding benefit-sharing in HIV vaccine trials and other health-related research conducted in resource-limited settings.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• First Indication of Solar <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mmultiscripts><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">B</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mprescripts/><mml:none/><mml:mrow><mml:mn>8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mmultiscripts></mml:mrow></mml:math> Neutrinos via Coherent Elastic Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering with XENONnT

  Physical Review Letters · 2024-11-07 · 88 citations

  articleOpen access

  We present the first measurement of nuclear recoils from solar ^{8}B neutrinos via coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering with the XENONnT dark matter experiment. The central detector of XENONnT is a low-background, two-phase time projection chamber with a 5.9 t sensitive liquid xenon target. A blind analysis with an exposure of 3.51 t×yr resulted in 37 observed events above 0.5 keV, with (26.4_{-1.3}^{+1.4}) events expected from backgrounds. The background-only hypothesis is rejected with a statistical significance of 2.73σ. The measured ^{8}B solar neutrino flux of (4.7_{-2.3}^{+3.6})×10^{6} cm^{-2} s^{-1} is consistent with results from the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory. The measured neutrino flux-weighted CEνNS cross section on Xe of (1.1_{-0.5}^{+0.8})×10^{-39} cm^{2} is consistent with the Standard Model prediction. This is the first direct measurement of nuclear recoils from solar neutrinos with a dark matter detector.

  PublisherDOI

• Patient Consent for Medical Student Pelvic Exams under Anesthesia: An Exploratory Retrospective Chart Review

  The Journal of Clinical Ethics · 2024-05-10 · 2 citations

  articleSenior author

  AbstractObjective: We performed this study to examine patients' choices to permit or refuse medical student pelvic examinations under anesthesia (EUAs) during planned gynecologic procedures. DESIGN: We conducted an exploratory retrospective chart review of electronic consent forms at a single academic medical center using contingency tables, logistic regression, and nonparametric tests to explore relationships between patient and physician characteristics and consent. RESULTS: We identified and downloaded electronic consent forms for a census of 4,000 patients undergoing gynecologic surgery from September 2020 through calendar year 2022. Forms were linked to anonymized medical record information. Of the 4,000 patients, 142 (3.6%) were removed from analysis because consent forms were incomplete. Of 3,858 patients, 308 (8.0%) were asked for EUA consent more than once, 46 of whom were not consistent. Overall, 3,308 (85.7%) patients consented every time asked, and 550 (14.2%) refused or limited EUA consent at least once. Nine patients limited their consent to female students, and two patients refused medical student participation at all. We performed exploratory multiple logistic regression analyses exploring differences in rates of consent across patient and physician demographic groups. CONCLUSIONS: We find that some patients are more likely than others to refuse a pelvic EUA, magnifying the dignitary harm from a nonconsensual invasion of intimate bodily integrity and perpetuating historic wrongs visited upon vulnerable people of color and religious minorities. Patients' rights to respect and control over their bodies require that physicians take seriously the ethical obligation to inform their patients and ask them for permission.

  PublisherDOI

• Patient consent for medical student pelvic exams under anesthesia: an exploratory retrospective chart review

  medRxiv · 2023-04-18 · 2 citations

  preprintOpen accessSenior authorCorresponding

  ABSTRACT Background Legal requirements and clinical practices of securing patient consent for medical student pelvic examinations under anesthesia (EUA) vary widely, while ethical arguments and patients’ preferences for being asked for consent are well known. Objective This study was performed to examine patients’ choices to permit or refuse medical student pelvic EUAs during planned gynecologic procedures. Study Design An exploratory retrospective chart review of electronic consent forms at a single academic medical center, using contingency table and logistic regression to explore relationships between patient and provider characteristics and consent. Results Electronic consent forms were downloaded for a census of 4000 patients undergoing gynecologic surgery from September 2020 through calendar year 2022 and linked to anonymized medical record information, including patient age, race, religion, and insurance carrier, along with physician name. Physicians were coded by gender, departmental affiliation, and status (attending, resident, or fellow). Of the 4000 patients, 142 (3.6%) patients were removed from analysis because of uncertainty about the EUA consent. Of the remainder, 308 (8.0%) were asked for EUA consent more than once. Overall, of 3858 patients, 3308 (85.7%) consented every time asked and 550 (14.2%) refused or limited EUA consent at least once. Nine patients limited their consent to female students, and 2 patients refused medical student participation at all. Of the 308 asked more than once, 46 were not consistent. Exploratory multiple logistic regression Consent for pelvic exams under anesthesia analysis showed that patients identifying as Black or African American (OR=0.482, p&lt;0.001) or Asian (OR=0.303, p&lt;0.001), or of Moslem/Muslim/Islamic faith (OR=0.598, p=0.008) were substantially less likely to grant EUA consent than other patients. Moreover, male physicians were somewhat more likely to secure consent from patients than their female colleagues (OR=1.427, p=0.016). Conclusions The finding that some patients are more likely than others to refuse a pelvic EUA magnifies the dignitary harm from a nonconsensual invasion of intimate bodily integrity and perpetuates the historic wrongs visited upon vulnerable people of color and religious minorities. Patient’s rights to control over their own bodies can only be respected if their physicians take seriously the ethical obligation to inform their patients and ask them for permission.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• Should HIV Vaccines Be Made Available at No or Subsidized Cost? A Qualitative Inquiry of HIV Vaccine Trial Stakeholders in Tanzania

  AJOB Empirical Bioethics · 2023-10-27 · 1 citations

  articleOpen accessSenior author

  BACKGROUND: The world has come closer than ever to discovering a viable HIV vaccine. However, it remains less certain whether HIV vaccines should be made available to participants and communities in which trials are run no or subsidized cost. Hence the essence of this inquiry. METHODOLOGY: This is a case study design using in-depth interviews (IDI) and focus group discussions (FGD) with researchers of HIV vaccine trials, institutional review board (IRB) members, HIV advocates, a policy maker, and members of community advisory board (CAB) in Tanzania. Participants were purposively selected and data thematically analyzed using MAXQDA software. RESULTS: Hosting a vaccine trial and the financial incapacity of individuals at increased risk of HIV were among the reasons in favor of free access to HIV vaccines. In contrast, the view that vaccines should be provided at a subsidized cost was related to high costs of vaccine development, financial return expectations by investors, and the fear of labeling the free vaccine as less important. Moreover, apart from governments and international organizations, well-off individuals could share the cost burden. CONCLUSION: Stakeholders engaging in active discussion about sharing the viable vaccine ought to take the aforementioned concerns into account and ensure unhindered access to individuals and host communities in Tanzania and beyond.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• A response to Al et al. Trials 2023;24:233

  Trials · 2023-08-13 · 1 citations

  letterOpen access1st authorCorresponding

  In their recent paper, Al and colleagues (Trials 2023;24:233) argue that manipulation of the methods of recruitment using well-known techniques in order to increase enrollment can be ethically acceptable. This brief response challenges that notion as an affront to voluntariness and a devolution of the ethics of human subjects research to the "ethics" of the marketplace.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

Recent grants

• NIH Grant R01HG001765

  NIH · $597k · 2001

Frequent coauthors

• Kevin E. Noonan

  36 shared

• Angela R. Bradbury

  University of Pennsylvania

  36 shared

• Courtney D. Storm

  John Marshall Law School

  36 shared

• Rebecca Spence

  American Society of Clinical Oncology

  36 shared

• Kenneth Offit

  Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

  18 shared

• Mildred K. Cho

  Stanford University

  14 shared

• Barbara K. Redman

  New York University

  12 shared

• Dennis J. Mazur

  Oregon Health & Science University

  10 shared