The COVID-19 global pandemic has stretched the capacities of public health institutions and health systems around the world, opening the door to a range of technologically-driven solutions. In this article, we seek to historicize the expanding role of digital health technologies and examine the political-economic context from which they have emerged. Drawing on critical insights from science and technology studies, we maintain that the rise of digital health technologies has been catalyzed by (...) broad shifts in global health governance that have expanded the role of market forces in public health and a unique set of political and economic crises that have accelerated the adoption of digital technologies—often under the guise of appeals to technological innovation to address “unprecedented” crises. These interrelated historical trends, we contend, are critical for understanding current state responses to the pandemic and possibilities for more equitable and democratic applications of technology in public health. (shrink)

We argue that while digital health technologies (e.g. artificial intelligence, smartphones, and virtual reality) present significant opportunities for improving the delivery of healthcare, key concepts that are used to evaluate and understand their impact can obscure significant ethical issues related to patient engagement and experience. Specifically, we focus on the concept of empowerment and ask whether it is adequate for addressing some significant ethical concerns that relate to digital health technologies for mental healthcare. We (...) frame these concerns using five key ethical principles for AI ethics (i.e. autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, justice, and explicability), which have their roots in the bioethical literature, in order to critically evaluate the role that digital health technologies will have in the future of digital healthcare. (shrink)

Recent publications on digital health technologies highlight the importance of ‘responsible’ use. References to the concept of responsibility are, however, frequently made without providing clear definitions of responsibility, thus leaving room for ambiguities. Addressing these uncertainties is critical since they might lead to misunderstandings, impacting the quality and safety of healthcare delivery. Therefore, this study investigates how responsibility is interpreted in the context of using digital health technologies, including artificial intelligence (AI), telemonitoring, wearables and (...) mobile apps. We conducted a scoping review with a systematic search in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL and Philosopher’s Index. A total of 34 articles were included and categorized using a theoretical framework of responsibility aspects, and revealed two main findings. First, we found that digital health technologies can expand and shift existing ‘role responsibilities’ among caregivers, patients and technology. Second, moral responsibility is often equated with liability or accountability, without clear justification. Articles describe new ways in which physicians can be held accountable, particularly in the context of AI, and discuss the emergence of a ‘responsibility gap’ where no-one can be fully responsible for AI-generated outcomes. The literature also shows that m-Health technologies can increase patients’ accountability for their own health. However, there was limited discussion in the reviewed literature on whether these attributions of accountability are appropriate. We conclude with implications for practice and suggestions for expanding the theoretical framework of moral responsibility, recommending further study on responsibility of collectives and artificial entities, and on the role of virtue in digital health. (shrink)

Health innovation is mainly envisioned in direct connection to medical research institutions or pharmaceutical and technology companies. Yet, these types of innovation often do not meet the needs and expectations of individuals affected by health conditions. With the emergence of digital health technologies and social media, we can observe a shift, which involves people living with illness modifying and improving medical and health devices outside of the formal research and development sector, figuring both as (...) users and innovators. This patient‐led innovation has been celebrated in innovation studies and economics as a “bottom‐up” type of innovation. In this article, we take a closer look at open‐source patient‐led innovation in the context of type 1 diabetes care. In our inquiry, we pay particular attention to the social and ethical dimensions of this innovation, building on empirical material. Upon exploring the notion of patient‐led innovation and its socio‐political context through the lens of intersectional and global health justice, we argue that a proactive strategy is needed to ensure that open‐source patient‐led innovation will be more globally accessible, center the health needs of the most underserved populations, as well as facilitate equitable and just health benefits. To support this aim, we provide a range of examples of different initiatives addressing the persistent inequalities that have so far inhibited patient‐led innovation from more fully materializing its innovative potential. (shrink)

Digital phenotyping is the term given to the capturing and use of user log data from health and wellbeing technologies used in apps and cloud-based services. This paper explores ethical issues in making use of digital phenotype data in the arena of digital health interventions. Products and services based on digital wellbeing technologies typically include mobile device apps as well as browser-based apps to a lesser extent, and can include telephony-based services, text-based (...) chatbots, and voice-activated chatbots. Many of these digital products and services are simultaneously available across many channels in order to maximize availability for users. Digital wellbeing technologies offer useful methods for real-time data capture of the interactions of users with the products and services. It is possible to design what data are recorded, how and where it may be stored, and, crucially, how it can be analyzed to reveal individual or collective usage patterns. The paper also examines digital phenotyping workflows, before enumerating the ethical concerns pertaining to different types of digital phenotype data, highlighting ethical considerations for collection, storage, and use of the data. A case study of a digital health app is used to illustrate the ethical issues. The case study explores the issues from a perspective of data prospecting and subsequent machine learning. The ethical use of machine learning and artificial intelligence on digital phenotype data and the broader issues in democratizing machine learning and artificial intelligence for digital phenotype data are then explored in detail. (shrink)

Despite advances in the treatment of heart failure, the physical symptoms and stress of the disease continue to negatively impact patients’ health outcomes. Technology now offers promising ways to integrate personalized support from health care professionals via a variety of platforms. Digital health technology solutions using mobile devices or those that allow remote patient monitoring are potentially more cost effective and may replace in-person interaction. Notably, digital health methods may not only improve clinical outcomes (...) but may also improve the psycho-social status of HF patients. Using digital health to address biopsychosocial variables, including elements of the person and their context is valuable when considering chronic illness and HF in particular, given the multiple, cross-level factors affecting chronic illness clinical management needed for HF self-care. (shrink)

Digital health includes applications for smartphones and smart speakers as well as more traditional ways to access health information electronically, such as through your health care provider's online web‐based patient portal. As the number of digital health offerings—such as smartphone health trackers and web‐based patient portals—grows, what benefit do ethics, or bioethics, perspectives bring to digital health product development? For starters, the field of bioethics is concerned about issues of social justice, (...) including equitable benefit and minimization and fair distribution of the burden of harms. Researchers who employ user‐centered design methods should consider what digital health applications and products would look like if issues like equity and accessibility were foregrounded throughout design and development. One group whose needs are often neglected in the design of digital health products is older adults. Many people anticipate that the digital divide among older adults will close as the current generation of tech‐savvy consumers ages up. But since technology is constantly evolving, this divide may be constantly recreated. As bioethics moves ever further into the technology era, I want it to be mindful of the creation of digital health care disparities. (shrink)

Digital Health Tools (DHTs), also known as patient self-surveilling strategies, have increasingly been promoted by health-care policy makers as technologies that have the capacity to transform patients’ lives. At the heart of the debate is the notion of empowerment. In this paper, we argue that what is required is not so much empowerment but rather a shift to enabling DHTs as digital companions. This will enable policy makers and health-care system designers to provide a (...) more balanced view—one that capitalises on the benefits of DHTs, while minimising the risks of potential harms. -/- . (shrink)

Much has been said about the potential of digital health technologies for democratizing health care. But how exactly is democratization with digital health technologies conceptualized and what does it involve? We investigate debates on the democratization of health care with digital health and identify that democratization is being envisioned as a matter of access to health information, health care, and patient empowerment. However, taking a closer look at the (...) growing pool of empirical data on digital health, we argue that these technologies come short of materializing these goals, given the unequal health outcomes they facilitate. Building on this evidence, we argue that not only debates on democratization need to be connected to concerns of social determinants of health but also debates on the impact of digital health need to go far beyond democratization and engage with concerns of health justice. (shrink)

In this paper we will be discussing the ethical risks of the transcendental quality of virtual spaces as they apply to digital health, especially in relation to new attempts to construct a “social mediome.” As we will discuss in the following section, phenomenology has raised criticisms against the context-lessness and ethical opacity of technology. The creation of a social mediome seems to come as an answer to this criticism as it creates a context that gives voice and flesh (...) to human beings within their virtual lives. Yet, as we will discuss in this paper, the transcendental quality of this social mediome might involve the risk of normalizing health in a way that would prevent individuals from achieving well-being according to the meaning that they personally attribute to it. (shrink)

Digital health technologies are often advocated as a way of helping people monitor, promote and manage their health, care for others and reduce the burden on healthcare systems. Yet these technologies have also been subject to criticism for limiting human flourishing and exacerbating socioeconomic disadvantage. Bioethical appraisals of digital health technologies tend to take a conventional risk‐benefit approach, positioning the human subject as a rational, autonomous agent who is acted on by (...) class='Hi'>technologies. In this paper, I present a case for adopting an alternative more‐than‐human perspective on bioethics. A more‐than‐human approach considers human‐technological assemblages and agencies as distributed, relational, situated and emergent. To illustrate the insights that this perspective can offer, I draw on the findings of four empirical projects I have conducted on people’s use of digital devices and platforms used for health‐related purposes, including social media groups and online forums, mobile apps and wearable devices. I conclude with the argument that a more‐than‐human approach to bioethics can begin to incorporate a new ‘zoë ethics’ that can acknowledge and address the deeper affective, multisensory and relational dimensions of humans’ encounters with and enactments of material things and nonhuman creatures. (shrink)

The proposition that digital innovations can put people in charge of their health has been accompanied by prolific talk of empowerment. In this paper we consider ethical challenges and opportunities of trying to achieve justice and empowerment using digital health initiatives. The language of empowerment can misleadingly suggest that by using technology, people can control their health and take responsibility for health outcomes to a greater degree than is realistic or fair. Also, digital (...) health empowerment often primarily reaches people who already have high technological and health literacy, leaving others behind. We critically investigate whether the concept of health empowerment could be re-engineered to mean something different, namely the process of improving the health literacy and access of those who least possess it, in line with recent proposals for conceptual engineering in the service of justice. We settle on the weaker conclusion that underlying ethical values including justice should be used to interpret the existing concept of empowerment. To conclude, we take a high-level view of various strategies for achieving the ethical value associated with digital health empowerment. (shrink)

Global Digital Health Market Size research report offers in-depth assessment of revenue growth, market definition, segmentation, industry potential, influential trends for understanding the future outlook and current prospects for the market. -/- Get a Sample Copy of the Report at – -/- The global digital health market size was valued at USD 548.08 billion in 2021 and is projected to grow from USD 742.72 billion in 2022 to USD 4,547.70 billion by 2029, exhibiting a CAGR of (...) 29.5% during the forecast period. Based on our analysis, the global market exhibited a higher growth of 81.2% in 2020 compared to 2019. The global COVID-19 pandemic has been unprecedented and staggering, with digital health experiencing higher-than-anticipated demand across all regions compared to pre-pandemic levels. -/- Drivers & Restraints -/- The global digital health market size stood at USD 452.79 Billion in 2023 and is projected to reach USD 1,965.30 Billion by 2030, exhibiting at a CAGR of 23.3% in the forecast period -/- This study provides information about the sales and revenue during the historic and forecasted period of (2024 to 2030). Understanding the segments helps in identifying the importance of different factors that aid market growth. Estimations about the CAGR value for specific forecast period, market drivers, market restraints, and competitive strategies are assessed in this Digital Health Market report. -/- This report focuses on Digital Health Market volume and value at the global level, regional level and company level. From a global perspective, this report represents overall Digital Health Market market size by analysing historical data and future prospect. Regionally, this report focuses on several key regions: North America, Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin America and Middle East and Africa. -/- Competitive Strategic Window: -/- The Competitive Strategic Window analyses the competitive landscape in terms of markets, applications, and geographies to help the vendor define an alignment or fit between their capabilities and opportunities for future growth prospects. It describes the optimal or favorable fit for the vendors to adopt successive merger and acquisition strategies, geography expansion, research & development, and new product introduction strategies to execute further business expansion and growth during a forecast period. -/- An Overview of the Impact of COVID-19 on this Market: -/- The advancement of COVID-19 has conveyed the world to a stop. We fathom that this prosperity crisis amazingly influences associations across ventures. Nevertheless, everything fortunate or unfortunate should reach a conclusion. There are a couple of organizations that are fighting and some are thriving. By and large, essentially every region is relied upon to be impacted by the pandemic. -/- We are advancing incessant endeavors to help your business support and create during COVID-19 pandemics. Considering our experience and expertise, we will offer you an impact examination of Covid episode across ventures to help you with preparing for what's to come. -/- Key players covered in the global Digital Health Market research report: -/- General Electric Company (U.S.) Koninklijke Philips N.V. (Netherlands) Allscripts Healthcare, LLC (U.S.) Cerner Corporation (U.S.) Epic Systems Corporation (U.S.) McKesson Corporation (U.S.) Medical Information Technology, Inc. (U.S.) Siemens Healthcare GmbH (Germany) Boston Scientific Corporation (U.S.) FUJIFILM Holdings Corporation (Japan) Medtronic (Ireland) IBM (U.S.) Validic (U.S.). (shrink)

In recent years, all major consumer technology corporations have moved into the domain of health research. This ‘Googlization of health research’ begs the question of how the common good will be served in this research. As critical data scholars contend, such phenomena must be situated within the political economy of digital capitalism in order to foreground the question of public interest and the common good. Here, trends like GHR are framed within a double, incommensurable logic, where private (...) gain and economic value are pitted against public good and societal value. While helpful for highlighting the exploitative potential of digital capitalism, this framing is limiting, insofar as it acknowledges only one conception of the common good. This article uses the analytical framework of modes of justification developed by Boltanksi and Thévenot to identify a plurality of orders of worth and conceptualizations of the common good at work in GHR. Not just the ‘civic’ and ‘market’ orders, but also an ‘industrial’, a ‘project’, and what I call a ‘vitalist’ order. Using promotional material of GHR initiatives and preliminary interviews with participants in GHR projects, I ask what moral orientations guide different actors in GHR. Engaging seriously with these different conceptions of the common good is paramount. First, in order to critically evaluate them and explicate what is at stake in the move towards GHR, and ultimately, in order to develop viable governance solutions that ensure strong ‘civic’ components. (shrink)

Wearable self-tracking devices capture multidimensional health data and offer several advantages including new ways of facilitating research. However, they also create a conflict between individual interests of avoiding privacy harms, and collective interests of assembling and using large health data sets for public benefits. While some scholars argue for transparency and accountability mechanisms to resolve this conflict, an average user is not adequately equipped to access and process information relating to the consequences of consenting to further uses of (...) her data. As an alternative, this paper argues for fiduciary relationships, which put deliberative demands on digital health data controllers to keep the interests of their data subjects at the forefront as well as cater to the contextual nature of privacy. These deliberative requirements ensure that users can engage in collective participation and share their health data at a lower risk of privacy harms. This paper also proposes a way to balance the flexible and open-ended nature of fiduciary law with the specific nature and scope of fiduciary duties that digital health data controllers should owe to their data subjects. (shrink)

Recent studies highlight the need for ethical and equitable digital health research that protects the rights and interests of racialized communities. We argue for practices in digital health that promote data self-determination for these communities, especially in data collection and management. We suggest that researchers partner with racialized communities to curate data that reflects their wellness understandings and health priorities, and respects their consent over data use for policy and other outcomes. These data governance approach (...) honors and builds on Indigenous Data Sovereignty (IDS) decolonial scholarship by Indigenous and non-indigenous researchers and its adaptations to health research involving racialized communities from former European colonies in the global South. We discuss strategies to practice equity, diversity, inclusion, accessibility and decolonization (EDIAD) principles in digital health. We draw upon and adapt the concept of Precision Health Equity (PHE) to emphasize models of data sharing that are co-defined by racialized communities and researchers, and stress their shared governance and stewardship of data that is generated from digital health research. This paper contributes to an emerging research on equity issues in digital health and reducing health, institutional, and technological disparities. It also promotes the self-determination of racialized peoples through ethical data management. (shrink)

In exploring the intra-active, relational and material connections between humans and non- humans, proponents of posthumanism advocate a questioning of the ‘human’ beyond its traditional anthropocentric conceptualization. By referring specifically to controversial developments in mHealth applications, this paper critically diverges from posthuman accounts of human/non-human assemblages. Indeed, we argue that, rather than ‘dissolving’ the human subject, the power of assemblages lie in their capacity to highlight the antagonisms and contradictions that inherently affirm the importance of the subject. In outlining this (...) claim, we propose a turn from the posthuman to the inhuman as a way of understanding the contemporary landscape of (digital) health. (shrink)

Definition of the problemHealth Apps are becoming increasingly important for a preventive and responsible orientation of the health system. Currently, most of these digital health applications (DiGA) are based on so-called self-tracking technologies which record physiological and psychological data via sensors, usually combined with personalized everyday information. In the last few years, these digital developments have launched an intense and clearly polarized debate about the opportunities and dangers of self-tracking in healthcare.ArgumentsAfter a brief overview of (...) medical self-tracking, this essay wants to systematize and check the polarized discourse on the basis of its decisive individual and social potentials. It turns out that self-measurement techniques have long been an integral part of medical practice in diagnostics and therapy.ConclusionThe area of tension between individual empowerment and potential loss of control by the users will be emphasized as being especially important for the implementation of health Apps in primary health care. Finally, possible implications for the current design of the new German Digital Care Law (Digitale-Versorgung-Gesetz) are shown and some existing “blind spots” are highlighted. (shrink)

In this paper, we explore the idea of digital technologies as truth‐bearers in health care and argue that devices like SenseCam, which facilitate reflection and memory recall, have a potentially vital role in healthcare situations when questions of veracity are at stake (e.g., when best interest decisions are being made). We discuss the role of digital technologies as truth‐bearers in the context of nursing people with dementia, as this is one area of health care (...) in which the topic of truth‐telling has been hotly debated. People with dementia have been excluded from research studies and decisions that affect their lives because they are not regarded as truth‐bearers—that is, as being capable of giving truthful accounts of their experiences. Also, considerable research has focused on the ethics of lying to and deceiving people with dementia. Given their increasing prominence in healthcare settings, there has been surprisingly little discussion of what role digital technologies might play in relation to these questions of truth and deception. Drawing on theories from science and technology studies (STS), we explore their possible future role in some of the truth‐making processes of health care. In particular, we discuss the potential value of constraints on use of SenseCam to support the accounts of people with dementia as part of their care. (shrink)

Healthcare expenditures account for approximately 9% of GDP in OECD countries and are on an upward trajectory (OECD, 2017). This significant financial burden, combined with an aging global population and increasing demand, emphasizes the imperative for sustained research and innovation to enhance health system efficacy. Key to this transformation are technological advancements, including digital health, which presents novel opportunities for improvement. Emerging digital health technologies, such as virtual consultations, complex imaging procedures, and electronic medical (...) records, are fundamental to modern healthcare infrastructures. However, significant gaps remain in the evaluation and understanding of these innovations, especially for nascent technological areas. This thesis addresses this subject, aiming to delineate how individuals and institutions can bolster their evaluative capabilities, strategic decision-making, and planning for the deployment of emerging digital healthcare technologies. The research methodology amalgamates theoretical exploration, literature scrutiny, and empirical examinations, presenting an integrated perspective that intersects the disciplines of Management & Decision Science, Technology & Innovation, and Health Economics & Outcomes Research. From an applied perspective, this research focuses on developing evidence within the context of pediatric healthcare in Canada — a context notably underrepresented in healthcare management research, despite its disproportionate per capita expenditure. Technologically, the predominant focus is on applications in virtual reality (VR) and three-dimensional (3D) printing and virtualization, though with the aspiration of ensuring the generalizability of results. The current thesis is structured to parallel the progression of the research itself, as three distinct phases; this begins with a comprehensive Background that contextualizes the initial intent, exploring the relationship between technology, innovation, and health outcomes. In this phase, each academic discipline is analyzed to identify base theoretical underpinnings for the research. The second phase of this work includes five empirical studies, each preceded by context-specific literature reviews for the respective technological domain, providing insight into the current state of evidence related to value-based assessment and economic evaluation in that area. Empirical studies included a randomized controlled trial and a cost consequences assessment of VR for pre-procedural preparation for medical imaging. Additionally, novel applications of 3D printing and virtualization are critically analyzed, accompanied by a multi-case study on the implementation of 3D printing in pediatrics, a cost-consequences study of applications for thoracoabdominal surgeries, and an outcomes study on the use of 3D virtualization in medical education during the COVID-19 pandemic. The final phase of this research includes the critical analysis and synthesis of findings into a proposal for a novel value-based assessment and decision-making framework specific to emerging health innovations; this framework integrates insights and resources for clinicians, administrators, and policymakers. The outcomes of this research are skewed toward Knowledge Users, but also aims to advance the theoretical basis for health technology assessment (HTA). (shrink)

Against the background of the increasing importance of digitization in health care, the paper examines how medical practitioners who are involved in the development of digital health technologies legitimate and criticize the implementation and use of digital health technologies. Adopting an institutional logics perspective, the study is based on qualitative interviews with persons working at the interface of medicine and digital technologies development in Switzerland. The findings indicate that the developers believe (...) that digital health technologies could harmonize current conflicts between an increasing economization of the health care system and professional–ethical demands. At the same time, however, they show that digital technologies can undermine the demand for medical autonomy, a central element of the medical ethos. (shrink)

This study aims to identify the challenges of the digital divide and privacy in digital health communication in Indonesia, with the background that digital technology has revolutionized various sectors, including healthcare, enhancing the efficiency and accessibility of services. Despite significant advancements, the digital divide and privacy issues remain major obstacles in adopting digital health technology in Indonesia. This research employs a quantitative approach, collecting data through surveys and in-depth interviews to evaluate the use (...) of digital media in health communication between doctors and patients. The main findings reveal that the use of digital media for health communication has significantly increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, despite the existing digital divide and privacy challenges. The study also highlights that improving digital literacy and technological infrastructure is crucial in addressing these gaps. Collaboration between the government and private sector is necessary to strengthen data privacy regulations and support the development of user-friendly digital health applications. The implications of this research include strategic recommendations to enhance access and efficiency of digital health services, and to strengthen data privacy protection, thereby supporting a more effective and inclusive digital health system in Indonesia. (shrink)

Background Conventional consent practices face ethical challenges in continuously evolving digital health environments due to their static, one-time nature. Dynamic consent offers a promising solution, providing adaptability and flexibility to address these ethical concerns. However, due to the immaturity of the concept and accompanying technology, dynamic consent has not yet been widely used in practice. This study aims to identify the facilitators of and barriers to adopting dynamic consent in real-world scenarios. Methods This scoping review, conducted in December (...) 2022, adhered to the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines, focusing on dynamic consent within the health domain. A comprehensive search across Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus yielded 22 selected articles based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Results The facilitators for the adoption of dynamic consent in digital health ecosystems were the provision of multiple consent modalities, personalized alternatives, continuous communication, and the dissemination of up-to-date information. Nevertheless, several barriers, such as consent fatigue, the digital divide, complexities in system implementation, and privacy and security concerns, needed to be addressed. This study also investigated current technological advancements and suggested considerations for further research aimed at resolving the remaining challenges surrounding dynamic consent. Conclusions Dynamic consent emerges as an ethically advantageous method for digital health ecosystems, driven by its adaptability and support for continuous, two-way communication between data subjects and consumers. Ethical implementation in real-world settings requires the development of a robust technical framework capable of accommodating the diverse needs of stakeholders, thereby ensuring ethical integrity and data privacy in the evolving digital health landscape. (shrink)

Bioethics has developed approaches to address ethical issues in health care, similar to how technology ethics provides guidelines for ethical research on artificial intelligence, big data, and robotic applications. As these digital technologies are increasingly used in medicine, health care and public health, thus, it is plausible that the approaches of technology ethics have influenced bioethical research. Similar to the “empirical turn” in bioethics, which led to intense debates about appropriate moral theories, ethical frameworks and (...) meta-ethics due to the increased use of empirical methodologies from social sciences, the proliferation of health-related subtypes of technology ethics might have a comparable impact on current bioethical research. This systematic journal review analyses the reporting of ethical frameworks and non-empirical methods in argument-based research articles on digital technologies in medicine, health care and public health that have been published in high-impact bioethics journals. We focus on articles reporting non-empirical research in original contributions. Our aim is to describe currently used methods for the ethical analysis of ethical issues regarding the application of digital technologies in medicine, health care and public health. We confine our analysis to non-empirical methods because empirical methods have been well-researched elsewhere. Finally, we discuss our findings against the background of established methods for health technology assessment, the lack of a typology for non-empirical methods as well as conceptual and methodical change in bioethics. Our descriptive results may serve as a starting point for reflecting on whether current ethical frameworks and non-empirical methods are appropriate to research ethical issues deriving from the application of digital technologies in medicine, health care and public health. (shrink)

Wearable devices are increasingly present in the health context, as tools for biomedical research and clinical care. In this context, wearables are considered key tools for a more digital, personalised, preventive medicine. At the same time, wearables have also been associated with issues and risks, such as those connected to privacy and data sharing. Yet, discussions in the literature have mostly focused on either technical or ethical considerations, framing these as largely separate areas of discussion, and the contribution (...) of wearables to the collection, development, application of biomedical knowledge has only partially been discussed. To fill in these gaps, in this article we provide an epistemic (knowledgerelated) overview of the main functions of wearable technology for health: monitoring, screening, detection, and prediction. On this basis, we identify 4 areas of concern in the application of wearables for these functions: data quality, balanced estimations, health equity, and fairness. To move the field forward in an effective and beneficial direction, we present recommendations for the 4 areas: local standards of quality, interoperability, access, and representativity. (shrink)

Common mental health disorders are rising globally, creating a strain on public healthcare systems. This has led to a renewed interest in the role that digital technologies may have for improving mental health outcomes. One result of this interest is the development and use of artificial intelligence for assessing, diagnosing, and treating mental health issues, which we refer to as ‘digital psychiatry’. This article focuses on the increasing use of digital psychiatry outside of (...) clinical settings, in the following sectors: education, employment, financial services, social media, and the digital well-being industry. We analyse the ethical risks of deploying digital psychiatry in these sectors, emphasising key problems and opportunities for public health, and offer recommendations for protecting and promoting public health and well-being in information societies. (shrink)

Digital contact tracing, in combination with widespread testing, has been a focal point for many plans to “reopen” economies while containing the spread of Covid‐19. Most digital contact tracing projects in the United States and Europe have prioritized privacy protections in the form of local storage of data on smartphones and the deidentification of information. However, in the prioritization of privacy in this narrow form, there is not sufficient attention given to weighing ethical trade‐offs within the context of (...) a public health pandemic or to the need to evaluate safety and effectiveness of software‐based technology applied to public health. (shrink)

Mobile phone-based applications (apps) can promote faster targeted actions to control COVID-19. However, digital contact tracing systems raise concerns about data security, system effectiveness, and their potential to normalise privacy-invasive surveillance technologies. In the absence of mandates, public uptake depends on the acceptability and perceived legitimacy of using technologies that log interactions between individuals to build public health capacity. We report on six online deliberative workshops convened in New South Wales to consider the appropriateness of using (...) the COVIDSafe app to enhance Australian contact tracing systems. All groups took the position (by majority) that the protections enacted in the app design and supporting legislation were appropriate. This support is contingent on several system attributes including: the voluntariness of the COVIDSafe app; that the system relies on proximity rather than location tracking; and, that data access is restricted to local public health practitioners undertaking contact tracing. Despite sustained scepticism in media coverage, there was an underlying willingness to trust Australian governing institutions such that in principle acceptance of the new contact tracing technology was easy to obtain. However, tensions between the need to prove system effectiveness through operational transparency and requirements for privacy protections could be limiting public uptake. Our study shows that informed citizens are willing to trade their privacy for common goods such as COVID-19 suppression. But low case numbers and cautionary public discourses can make trustworthiness difficult to establish because some will only do so when it can be demonstrated that the benefits justify the costs to individuals. (shrink)

Digital Health Technologies (DHTs) are currently the subject of much debate both in terms of their technological frontiers as well as their ethical, legal and societal implications (ELSI). Regulation of such technologies as medical devices currently lacks behind their level of adoption. Digital Twins are the next evolution step of such DHTs and provide an opportunity to anticipate and act on ELSI before adoption again leaps before the necessary review. This paper introduces the concept and (...) use cases of digital twins in medicine, then frames the debate through the lens of related technologies, machine learning and personalized medicine, and maps ethical challenges stemming from those. Finally, we lay out how digital twins may change and challenge the future practice of medicine. (shrink)

Digital health and welfare technologies and artificial intelligence are proposed to revolutionise healthcare systems around the world by enabling new models of care. Digital health and welfare technologies enable remote monitoring and treatments, and artificial intelligence is proposed as a means of prediction instead of reaction to individuals’ health and as an enabler of proactive care and rehabilitation. The digital transformation not only affects hospital and primary care but also how the community (...) meets older people's needs. Community care is often provided by informal and formal care‐givers, most of whom are women. Gender equality is at the heart of many national strategies, but do all genders have equal rights, responsibilities and opportunities when it comes to community care and its digital transformation? The digital transformation of community care is entangled with how care is provided to older people and the working conditions of community‐care professionals. Current and, even more so, future community‐care systems are and will be partly constituted by networks of technological artefacts. These health and welfare technological artefacts and the discourse surrounding them mediate and constitute social relations and community care. This article looks into how health and welfare technology and artificial intelligence‐based devices and systems mediate and constitute gender relations in community care and presents an argument for reflexivity, embodiment, pluralism, participation and ecology as an alternative strategy to treating community care as one‐size‐fit‐all and being blind to gender‐related issues. (shrink)

Digital mental health technologies have been promoted with the promise of delivering wide-scale access to more efficient and effective mental health diagnosis and care. During the pandemic, the rap...

While the implementation of digital technology in psychiatry appears promising, there is an urgent need to address the implications of the absence of ethical design in the early development of such technologies. Some authors have noted the gap between technology development and ethical analysis and have called for an upstream examination of the ethical issues raised by digital technologies. In this paper, we address this suggestion, particularly in relation to digital healthcare technologies for patients (...) with schizophrenia spectrum disorders. The introduction of digital technologies in psychiatry offers a broad spectrum of diagnostic and treatment options tailored to the health needs and goals of patients’ care. These technologies include wearable devices, smartphone applications for high-immersive virtual realities, smart homes, telepsychiatry and messaging systems for patients in rural areas. The availability of these technologies could increase access to mental health services and improve the diagnostics of mental disorders.Additional Instruction AbstractIn this descriptive review, we systematize ethical concerns about digital technologies for mental health with a particular focus on individuals suffering from schizophrenia. There are many unsolved dilemmas and conflicts of interest in the implementation of these technologies, such as (1) the lack of evidence on efficacy and impact on self-perception; (2) the lack of clear standards for the safety of their daily implementation; (3) unclear roles of technology and a shift in the responsibilities of all parties; (4) no guarantee of data confidentiality; and (5) the lack of a user-centered design that meets the particular needs of patients with schizophrenia. mHealth can improve care in psychiatry and make mental healthcare services more efficient and personalized while destigmatizing mental health disorders. To ensure that these technologies will benefit people with mental health disorders, we need to heighten sensitivity to ethical issues among mental healthcare specialists, health policy makers, software developers, patients themselves and their proxies. Additionally, we need to develop frameworks for furthering sustainable development in the digital technologies industry and for the responsible usage of such technologies for patients with schizophrenia in the clinical setting. We suggest that digital technology in psychiatry, particularly for schizophrenia and other serious mental health disorders, should be integrated into treatment with professional supervision rather than as a self-treatment tool. (shrink)

The rapid uptake of digital technologies is constantly transforming the modern culture of sports spectating; however, relatively little is known about the impact of digitalization on the changing face of global sports-consuming audiences, particularly from a qualitative perspective. In this article, the relationship between modern mass digital technologies and audiences of sports spectators is described and explained by taking a customer-centric approach to grounded theory using a literature review and in-depth qualitative semi-structured interviews with sports marketing, (...) management, and technology professionals. The qualitative approach permits the gathering of in-depth insights into a problem, generates new concepts through data synthesis and analysis, and captures changing attitudes within the sports industry. Moreover, the qualitative approach to research is not bound by the limitations of quantitative methods and focuses on the primary questions of “how” and “why” digital technology’s mass deployment and diffusion have transformed content consumption in the sports industry. The analysis first systematizes and codes the collected data. Second, all the materials are iteratively read and the key points are outlined. Using the iterative analysis, the theoretical and empirical insights and findings are synthesized in order to achieve the results. Finally, dimensions of the transformation of sports spectators’ consumption are identified and explained. The research implications highlight “how” and “why” modern digital technologies have changed the sports-consuming audience by making it more inclusive in terms of age, gender, demographics, social and health status. These findings are useful for sport managers to better understand their audiences and processes in an ever-changing global society. (shrink)

This book highlights both the relation between technology and care, and the normative aspects of economic analyses in health care. A series of concrete examples from various clinical fields (prenatal diagnosis, genetic tests, digital imaging in psychiatry, tube feeding in care for the elderly, and palliative sedation) helps the authors to consider how to integrate these technologies in a care context aimed upon humaneness. Each topic is analysed by leading European clinicians and health care ethicists.

Digital twinning in medicine refers to the idea of simulating a person’s organs, muscles or perhaps their entire body, in order to arrive more effectively at accurate diagnoses, to make treatment recommendations that reflect chances of success and possible side-effects, and to better understand the long-term trajectory of an individual’s overall condition. Digital twins, in these ways, build on the recent movement toward personalised medicine,1 and they undoubtedly present us with exciting opportunities to advance our health. Of (...) course, the opportunities are accompanied by newfound challenges—a common refrain in discussions surrounding emerging technologies. In a recent article, Matthias Braun surveys numerous problems, including the precision of simulations, ownership and consent to the use of digital models, and issues of justice in assuring equitable access to novel medical systems.2 In particular, he places special emphasis on the notion of representation. According to Braun, proper representation naturally calls for correspondence—namely a precise model offering dynamic, real-time feedback as well as transparency, both for the patient and the practitioner, in terms of the data being employed. While technical challenges remain, these goals are quite clear and relatively uncontroversial. Where a host of questions arise, however, is in the discussion on the interaction between the represented persons and their simulations. Alongside questions regarding ownership of one’s digital twin, Braun raises the concern that ‘giving …. (shrink)

Information and computer technology has come to play an increasingly important role in medicine, to the extent that e-health has been described as a disruptive innovation or revolution in healthcare. The attention is very much focused on the technology itself, and advances that have been made in genetics and biology. This leads to the question: What is changing in medicine today concerning e-health? To what degree could these changes be characterized as a ‘revolution’? We will apply the work (...) of Thomas Kuhn, Larry Laudan, Michel Foucault and other philosophers—which offers an alternative understanding of progress and revolution in medicine to the classic discovery-oriented approach—to our analysis. Nowadays, the long-standing curative or reactive paradigm in medicine is facing a crisis due to an aging population, a significant increase in chronic diseases and the development of more expensive diagnostic tools and therapies. This promotes the evolution towards a new paradigm with an emphasis on preventive medicine. E-health constitutes an essential part of this new paradigm that seeks to solve the challenges presented by an aging population, skyrocketing costs and so forth. Our approach changes the focus from the technology itself toward the underlying paradigm shift in medicine. We will discuss the relevance of this approach by applying it to the surge in digital self-tracking through health apps and wearables: the recognition of the underlying paradigm shift leads to a more comprehensive understanding of self-tracking than a solely discovery-oriented or technology-focused view can provide. (shrink)

The proliferation of Generative Artificial Intelligence (Generative AI) has led to an increased reliance on AI‐generated content for designing and deploying digital health interventions. While generative AI has the potential to facilitate and automate healthcare, there are concerns that AI‐generated content and AI‐generated health advice could trigger, perpetuate, or exacerbate prior traumatic experiences among vulnerable populations. In this discussion article, I examined how generative‐AI‐powered digital health interventions could trigger, perpetuate, or exacerbate emotional trauma among vulnerable (...) populations who rely on digital health interventions as complementary or alternative sources of seeking health services or information. I then proposed actionable strategies for mitigating AI‐generated trauma in the context of digital health interventions. The arguments raised in this article are expected to shift the focus of AI practitioners against prioritizing dominant narratives in AI algorithms into seriously considering the needs of vulnerable minority groups who are at the greatest risk for trauma but are often invisible in AI data sets, AI algorithms, and their resultant technologies. (shrink)

Innovation is progressively needed in responding to global challenges. Moreover, the increasing complexity of challenges implies demand for the usage of multisectoral and policy mix approaches. Wicked problems can be tackled by "integrated innovation" that combines the coordinated implementation of social, technological, and health innovation co-created by entities of the public sector, the private sector, the non-governmental sector, and the informal sector. This Research Topic focuses on filling the knowledge gaps about the selected types of innovation. First, regarding social (...) innovation that can be understood as new strategies, concepts, products, services, and organizational forms that allow the satisfaction of human needs. Second, a technological innovation that refers to new or remarkably improved products, goods, or services in terms of their technical specifications, components, materials, software, design, or other functional features. Third, health innovation that focuses on novel or enhanced health policies, systems, products, technologies, services, and care delivery schemes to improve people’s health. Finally, this Research Topic highlights attempts to develop integrated innovation that can add value to social policy, health policy, and environmental policy by improving efficiency, effectiveness, quality, sustainability, safety, and affordability. (shrink)

This article is the result of an international research between law and ethics scholars from Universities in France and Switzerland, who have been closely collaborating with technical experts on the design and use of information and communication technologies in the fields of human health and security. The interdisciplinary approach is a unique feature and guarantees important new insights in the social, ethical and legal implications of these technologies for the individual and society as a whole. Its aim (...) is to shed light on the tension between secrecy and transparency in the digital era. A special focus is put from the perspectives of psychology, medical ethics and European law on the contradiction between individuals’ motivations for consented processing of personal data and their fears about unknown disclosure, transferal and sharing of personal data via information and communication technologies (named the “privacy paradox”). Potential benefits and harms for the individual and society resulting from the use of computers, mobile phones, the Internet and social media are being discussed. Furthermore, the authors point out the ethical and legal limitations inherent to the processing of personal data in a democratic society governed by the rule of law. Finally, they seek to demonstrate that the impact of information and communication technology use on the individuals’ well-being, the latter being closely correlated with a high level of fundamental rights protection in Europe, is a promising feature of the socalled “e-democracy” as a new way to collectively attribute meaning to large-scale online actions, motivations and ideas. (shrink)

Mobile applications (apps) have gained significant popularity as a new intervention strategy responding to violence against women and girls. Despite their growing relevance, an assessment from the perspective of public health ethics is still lacking. Here, we base our discussion on the understanding of violence against women and girls as a multidimensional, global public health issue on structural, societal and individual levels and situate it within the theoretical framework of structural injustice, including epistemic injustice. Based on a systematic (...) app review we previously conducted, we evaluate the content and functions of apps through the lens of structural injustice. We argue that technological solutions such as apps may be a useful tool in the fight against violence against women and girls but have to be situated within the broader frame of public health that considers the structural dimensions of such violence. Ultimately, the concerns raised by structural injustice are—alongside key concerns of safety, data privacy, importance of human supportive contact, and so forth—crucial dimensions in the ethical assessment of such apps. However, research on the role and relevance of apps as strategies to address the structural and epistemic dimensions of violence remains scarce. This article aims to provide a foundation for further discussion in this area and could be applicable to other areas in public health policy and practice. (shrink)