Wearable devices—addressing bias and inequity

Zinzuwadia, Aniket; Singh, Jagmeet P.

doi:10.1016/s2589-7500(22)00194-7

Cited by 25 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Privacy, security, ethics, and user acceptance are important concerns for wearables, requiring attention in healthcare settings [ 66 ]. Additionally, digital literacy may be necessary for the optimal use of wearables, posing a challenge for some users [ 67 ]. Rigorous testing and approval processes limit the availability of devices.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sensitivity and Specificity of Wearables for Atrial Fibrillation in Elderly Populations: A Systematic Review

Babar,

Cheema,

Ahmad

et al. 2023

Curr Cardiol Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose of Review This study aims to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of wearable devices for AF detection in older adults, as well as examine the incidence of AF across various studies, contextual factors impacting AF detection, and safety and adverse events associated with wearable use. Recent Findings A systematic search of three databases identified 30 studies on wearables for AF detection in older adults, encompassing 111,798 participants. Both PPG-based and single-lead electrocardiography-based wearables show scalable potential for screening and managing AF. Summary The results of this systematic review demonstrate that wearable devices, such as smartwatches, can effectively identify arrhythmias like AF in older adults, with scalable potential in PPG-based and single-lead electrocardiography-based wearables. As wearable technologies continue to gain prominence in healthcare, it is crucial to understand their challenges and incorporate them as preventative and monitoring tools for AF detection in elderly populations to improve patient care and prevention techniques.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sensitivity and Specificity of Wearables for Atrial Fibrillation in Elderly Populations: A Systematic Review

Babar,

Cheema,

Ahmad

et al. 2023

Curr Cardiol Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Restructuring would involve evaluating racial equity within the FDA approval process. Currently, the FDA 510(k) clearance process, which is the way to FDA approval for most wearable devices, only requires equivalent safety and efficacy to products that are already available 17 . As initial wearable device studies did not focus on equity and technology validity across racial phenotypes, deficits in the representation of marginalized populations have continued.…”

Section: Consumer Wearablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Promoting racial equity in digital health: applying a cross-disciplinary equity framework

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Even as innovation occurs within digital medicine, challenges around equity and racial health disparities remain. Golden et al. evaluate structural racism in their recent paper focused on reproductive health. They recommend a framework to Remove, Repair, Restructure, and Remediate. We propose applying the framework to three areas within digital medicine: artificial intelligence (AI) applications, wearable devices, and telehealth. With this approach, we can continue to work towards an equitable future for digital medicine.

show abstract

“…Several additional ethical issues fall outside independent review committees’ typical purview review but are worth mentioning. First, many wearable devices that utilize biomedical sensors—such as pulse oximeters and heart rate monitors—have been shown to be less accurate for individuals with darker skin tones 13 . Researchers should take care not to test their prototypes on homogenous groups of individuals, which may introduce bias and limit generalizability.…”

Section: Additional Ethical Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethical considerations for researchers developing and testing minimal-risk devices

Wexler

Largent

2023

Nat Commun

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This comment provides an overview of ethical considerations for researchers developing and testing minimal-risk devices that interact or interface with people, such as electronic wearables and biomedical sensors. We outline the process of independent review, emphasizing that research can undergo different levels of review depending on its design and risk level. Using scenarios drawn from our own experience, we outline salient ethical considerations for research with such minimal-risk devices.

show abstract

Wearable devices—addressing bias and inequity

Cited by 25 publications

References 8 publications

Sensitivity and Specificity of Wearables for Atrial Fibrillation in Elderly Populations: A Systematic Review

Sensitivity and Specificity of Wearables for Atrial Fibrillation in Elderly Populations: A Systematic Review

Promoting racial equity in digital health: applying a cross-disciplinary equity framework

Ethical considerations for researchers developing and testing minimal-risk devices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About