BackgroundPoor information privacy practices have been identified in health apps. Medical app accreditation programs offer a mechanism for assuring the quality of apps; however, little is known about their ability to control information privacy risks. We aimed to assess the extent to which already-certified apps complied with data protection principles mandated by the largest national accreditation program.MethodsCross-sectional, systematic, 6-month assessment of 79 apps certified as clinically safe and trustworthy by the UK NHS Health Apps Library. Protocol-based testing was used to characterize personal information collection, local-device storage and information transmission. Observed information handling practices were compared against privacy policy commitments.ResultsThe study revealed that 89 % (n = 70/79) of apps transmitted information to online services. No app encrypted personal information stored locally. Furthermore, 66 % (23/35) of apps sending identifying information over the Internet did not use encryption and 20 % (7/35) did not have a privacy policy. Overall, 67 % (53/79) of apps had some form of privacy policy. No app collected or transmitted information that a policy explicitly stated it would not; however, 78 % (38/49) of information-transmitting apps with a policy did not describe the nature of personal information included in transmissions. Four apps sent both identifying and health information without encryption. Although the study was not designed to examine data handling after transmission to online services, security problems appeared to place users at risk of data theft in two cases.ConclusionsSystematic gaps in compliance with data protection principles in accredited health apps question whether certification programs relying substantially on developer disclosures can provide a trusted resource for patients and clinicians. Accreditation programs should, as a minimum, provide consistent and reliable warnings about possible threats and, ideally, require publishers to rectify vulnerabilities before apps are released.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12916-015-0444-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The EAS FHSC is an international initiative involving a network of investigators interested in FH from around 70 countries.• Information on FH prevalence is lacking in most countries; where available, data tend to align with contemporary estimates.• FH diagnosis and management varies widely across countries, with overall suboptimal identification and under-treatment.• In most countries diagnosis primarily relies on DLCN criteria, and less frequently on Simon Broom or MEDPED.• Therapy for FH is not universally reimbursed, and criteria vary across countries. Access to PCSK9i and apheresis is limited.

No abstract

ImportanceFamilial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is an underdiagnosed and undertreated genetic disorder that leads to premature morbidity and mortality due to atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Familial hypercholesterolemia affects 1 in 200 to 250 people around the world of every race and ethnicity. The lack of general awareness of FH among the public and medical community has resulted in only 10% of the FH population being diagnosed and adequately treated. The World Health Organization recognized FH as a public health priority in 1998 during a consultation meeting in Geneva, Switzerland. The World Health Organization report highlighted 11 recommendations to address FH worldwide, from diagnosis and treatment to family screening and education. Research since the 1998 report has increased understanding and awareness of FH, particularly in specialty areas, such as cardiology and lipidology. However, in the past 20 years, there has been little progress in implementing the 11 recommendations to prevent premature atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in an entire generation of families with FH.ObservationsIn 2018, the Familial Hypercholesterolemia Foundation and the World Heart Federation convened the international FH community to update the 11 recommendations. Two meetings were held: one at the 2018 FH Foundation Global Summit and the other during the 2018 World Congress of Cardiology and Cardiovascular Health. Each meeting served as a platform for the FH community to examine the original recommendations, assess the gaps, and provide commentary on the revised recommendations. The Global Call to Action on Familial Hypercholesterolemia thus represents individuals with FH, advocacy leaders, scientific experts, policy makers, and the original authors of the 1998 World Health Organization report. Attendees from 40 countries brought perspectives on FH from low-, middle-, and high-income regions. Tables listing country-specific government support for FH care, existing country-specific and international FH scientific statements and guidelines, country-specific and international FH registries, and known FH advocacy organizations around the world were created.Conclusions and RelevanceBy adopting the 9 updated public policy recommendations created for this document, covering awareness; advocacy; screening, testing, and diagnosis; treatment; family-based care; registries; research; and cost and value, individual countries have the opportunity to prevent atherosclerotic heart disease in their citizens carrying a gene associated with FH and, likely, all those with severe hypercholesterolemia as well.