Privacy Attitudes among Early Adopters of Emerging Health Technologies

Cheung, Cynthia; Bietz, Matthew J.; Patrick, Kevin; Bloss, Cinnamon S.

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0166389

Cited by 30 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such inconclusive and contradicting findings may indicate that older adults had a lack of understanding of potential privacy implications. Uncertainties around privacy implications for emerging technologies were frequently identified themes among older adults [ 49 , 50 ]. Despite the uncertainties over privacy implications, older adults are willing to share information and compromise privacy when the technology is perceived as beneficial [ 17 ], improve or maintain independence [ 51 ], and valuable [ 52 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

User Acceptance of Wrist-Worn Activity Trackers Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults: Mixed Method Study

Puri¹,

Kim²,

Nguyen³

et al. 2017

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth

160

132

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundWearable activity trackers are newly emerging technologies with the anticipation for successfully supporting aging-in-place. Consumer-grade wearable activity trackers are increasingly ubiquitous in the market, but the attitudes toward, as well as acceptance and voluntary use of, these trackers in older population are poorly understood.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to assess acceptance and usage of wearable activity trackers in Canadian community-dwelling older adults, using the potentially influential factors as identified in literature and technology acceptance model.MethodsA mixed methods design was used. A total of 20 older adults aged 55 years and older were recruited from Southwestern Ontario. Participants used 2 different wearable activity trackers (Xiaomi Mi Band and Microsoft Band) separately for each segment in the crossover design study for 21 days (ie, 42 days total). A questionnaire was developed to capture acceptance and experience at the end of each segment, representing 2 different devices. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 4 participants, and a content analysis was performed.ResultsParticipants ranged in age from 55 years to 84 years (mean age: 64 years). The Mi Band gained higher levels of acceptance (16/20, 80%) compared with the Microsoft Band (10/20, 50%). The equipment characteristics dimension scored significantly higher for the Mi Band (P<.05). The amount a participant was willing to pay for the device was highly associated with technology acceptance (P<.05). Multivariate logistic regression with 3 covariates resulted in an area under the curve of 0.79. Content analysis resulted in the formation of the following main themes: (1) smartphones as facilitators of wearable activity trackers; (2) privacy is less of a concern for wearable activity trackers, (3) value proposition: self-awareness and motivation; (4) subjective norm, social support, and sense of independence; and (5) equipment characteristics matter: display, battery, comfort, and aesthetics.ConclusionsOlder adults were mostly accepting of wearable activity trackers, and they had a clear understanding of its value for their lives. Wearable activity trackers were uniquely considered more personal than other types of technologies, thereby the equipment characteristics including comfort, aesthetics, and price had a significant impact on the acceptance. Results indicated that privacy was less of concern for older adults, but it may have stemmed from a lack of understanding of the privacy risks and implications. These findings add to emerging research that investigates acceptance and factors that may influence acceptance of wearable activity trackers among older adults.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

User Acceptance of Wrist-Worn Activity Trackers Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults: Mixed Method Study

Puri¹,

Kim²,

Nguyen³

et al. 2017

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth

160

132

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although some earlier studies have also investigated the motivations and attitudes of individuals toward DTC-GT and genetic and genomic data sharing (Ball et al 2014;Brown Trinidad et al 2010;Cheung et al 2016;Critchley, Nicol, and Otlowski 2015;Lemke et al 2010;McGuire et al 2008;Oliver et al 2012;Vayena 2014;Wallis, Rolando, and Borgman 2013), this is the first study to interview individuals who have decided to share their data publicly without any institutional oversight. We analyzed the interviews by thematic coding analysis, and merged ideas topically (Thomas 2003).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genes wide open: Data sharing and the social gradient of genomic privacy

Haeusermann

Fadda

Blasimme

et al. 2018

AJOB Empirical Bioethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study reports on 13 semistructured in-depth interviews to qualitatively explore the experiences of individuals who publicly shared their direct-to-consumer genetic testing results on the platform openSNP. In particular, we focused on interviewees' understanding of privacy. Participants reported that the likelihood and the magnitude of privacy harms depend on gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, the stigma associated with certain clinical conditions, the existence of adequate legislation, and the nature of national health care systems. Some participants expressed the view that those who enjoy higher socioeconomic status or are better protected by their country's legislation have a responsibility to share their genetic data. Our study shows that people who share their genetic data publicly online-far from being insensitive to privacy risks-have a complex understanding of the social, relational, and contextual nature of genetic privacy.

show abstract

“…While it might be assumed that early adoption of health technologies is coupled with a disinterest in privacy, a qualitative study of privacy attitudes among early adopters of personal wearable sensors and health apps demonstrated that members of this group placed a value on personal data privacy and expressed the desire to control their personal data. 31 Such findings underscore the importance of notification about data uses and consent in maintaining relations of trust when asking for personal health information.…”

Section: Continued Importance Of Informed Consent In the Age Of Mhealthmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Studies of attitudes toward data sharing indicate that people prefer to be asked for permission to use their data in research, especially when health information is involved. 6,[28][29][30][31] A recent survey showed that 68% of users of digital self-tracking technologies said they would share personal health information "if privacy were assured" and 67% felt anonymity was "very" or "extremely" important. 6 Another survey found that respondents across generations were concerned about health privacy, 32 contrary to popular assumptions about millennial disinterest in privacy.…”

Section: Continued Importance Of Informed Consent In the Age Of Mhealthmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Could Commercial Terms of Use and Privacy Policies Undermine Informed Consent in the Age of Mobile Health?

2018

AMA Journal of Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Granular personal data generated by mobile health (mHealth) technologies coupled with the complexity of mHealth systems creates risks to privacy that are difficult to foresee, understand, and communicate, especially for purposes of informed consent. Moreover, commercial terms of use, to which users are almost always required to agree, depart significantly from standards of informed consent. As data use scandals increasingly surface in the news, the field of mHealth must advocate for user-centered privacy and informed consent practices that motivate patients' and research participants' trust. We review the challenges and relevance of informed consent and discuss opportunities for creating new standards for user-centered informed consent processes in the age of mHealth. Privacy and Informed Consent in the Age of Mobile HealthMobile health (mHealth) refers to the use of technologies such as smartphone apps or wearable sensors to monitor health. In the past decade, there has been increasing enthusiasm for the role of mHealth in promoting precision medicine and learning health systems. 1 However, there are significant risks to collecting, transmitting, and storing personal health data that experts and the public alike have been slow to recognize. Current news about the sheer amount of data shared or sold by health technology companies and by platforms like Facebook, the lack of transparency about these activities, and the many possible malicious uses of these data have sparked a "techlash" reflecting public unease about many technologies central to mHealth research and clinical care. [2][3][4] In the current climate, demonstrating a clear and consistent commitment to the tenets of informed consent will be more important than ever for conscientious scientists and health care practitioners who wish to maintain the trust of participants and patients involved in mHealth studies or clinical interventions. ELSI research agenda.

show abstract

Privacy Attitudes among Early Adopters of Emerging Health Technologies

Cited by 30 publications

References 19 publications

User Acceptance of Wrist-Worn Activity Trackers Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults: Mixed Method Study

User Acceptance of Wrist-Worn Activity Trackers Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults: Mixed Method Study

Genes wide open: Data sharing and the social gradient of genomic privacy

How Could Commercial Terms of Use and Privacy Policies Undermine Informed Consent in the Age of Mobile Health?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About