scholarly journals Wearables in the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: What Are They Good for?

10.2196/25137 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (12) ◽  
pp. e25137
Author(s):  
Brinnae Bent ◽  
Jessilyn P Dunn
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Medical Decision Making ◽  
Evaluation Process ◽  
Blood Oxygenation ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Process Data ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Minimum Requirements ◽  
Monitoring Technologies

Recently, companies such as Apple Inc, Fitbit Inc, and Garmin Ltd have released new wearable blood oxygenation measurement technologies. Although the release of these technologies has great potential for generating health-related information, it is important to acknowledge the repercussions of consumer-targeted biometric monitoring technologies (BioMeTs), which in practice, are often used for medical decision making. BioMeTs are bodily connected digital medicine products that process data captured by mobile sensors that use algorithms to generate measures of behavioral and physiological function. These BioMeTs span both general wellness products and medical devices, and consumer-targeted BioMeTs intended for general wellness purposes are not required to undergo a standardized and transparent evaluation process for ensuring their quality and accuracy. The combination of product functionality, marketing, and the circumstances of the global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic have inevitably led to the use of consumer-targeted BioMeTs for reporting health-related measurements to drive medical decision making. In this viewpoint, we urge consumer-targeted BioMeT manufacturers to go beyond the bare minimum requirements described in US Food and Drug Administration guidance when releasing information on wellness BioMeTs. We also explore new methods and incentive systems that may result in a clearer public understanding of the performance and intended use of consumer-targeted BioMeTs.

scholarly journals Wearables in the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: What Are They Good for? (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brinnae Bent ◽  
Jessilyn P Dunn
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Medical Decision Making ◽  
Evaluation Process ◽  
Blood Oxygenation ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Process Data ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Minimum Requirements ◽  
Monitoring Technologies

UNSTRUCTURED Recently, companies such as Apple Inc, Fitbit Inc, and Garmin Ltd have released new wearable blood oxygenation measurement technologies. Although the release of these technologies has great potential for generating health-related information, it is important to acknowledge the repercussions of consumer-targeted biometric monitoring technologies (BioMeTs), which in practice, are often used for medical decision making. BioMeTs are bodily connected digital medicine products that process data captured by mobile sensors that use algorithms to generate measures of behavioral and physiological function. These BioMeTs span both general wellness products and medical devices, and consumer-targeted BioMeTs intended for general wellness purposes are not required to undergo a standardized and transparent evaluation process for ensuring their quality and accuracy. The combination of product functionality, marketing, and the circumstances of the global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic have inevitably led to the use of consumer-targeted BioMeTs for reporting health-related measurements to drive medical decision making. In this viewpoint, we urge consumer-targeted BioMeT manufacturers to go beyond the bare minimum requirements described in US Food and Drug Administration guidance when releasing information on wellness BioMeTs. We also explore new methods and incentive systems that may result in a clearer public understanding of the performance and intended use of consumer-targeted BioMeTs.

Exceptions to the Legal Requirements: Emergency, Waiver, Therapeutic Privilege, and Compulsory Treatment

2001 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica W. Berg ◽  
Paul S. Appelbaum ◽  
Charles W. Lidz ◽  
Lisa S. Parker
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Informed Consent ◽  
Medical Decision Making ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Consent To Treatment ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Consent Requirement ◽  
The Right ◽  
Therapeutic Privilege

In the preceding chapter we spoke of the requirement for informed consent in absolute terms, as something that was an invariable component of medical decision making. Over the years, courts have come to recognize that there are a number of situations in which physicians are permitted to render treatment without patients’ informed consent. Even under the earlier simple consent requirement, consent to treatment was not required in all situations. There are different kinds of situations in which requiring disclosure and obtaining consent could be detrimental to the patient, such as in an emergency or when the disclosure itself would harm the patient, and therefore in these situations informed consent is not required. Patients may also waive, or give up, the right to be informed and/or to consent. Here the concern is not with promoting health values but with promoting autonomy. Informed consent may also be dispensed with in a fourth set of cases, those of legally required treatment, in which the harm from requiring informed consent is not necessarily to the patient (or the patient alone) but to other important societal interests (e.g., civil commitment of the dangerous mentally ill—see Chapter 11—or forced treatment of patients with infectious disease). In addition, informed consent requirements are modified when a patient is incompetent (see Chapter 5). Each of these exceptions contains the potential for undermining the values sought to be implemented by the informed consent doctrine: self-determination and informed decision making. Exceptions that are too broadly defined and applied are a threat to these values. On the other hand, these exceptions are an important vehicle for the interjection into the decisionmaking process of another set of values, society’s interest in promoting the health of individuals. When judiciously defined and applied, the exceptions accord health-related values their due. However, the exceptions can be, and sometimes have been, defined so broadly as to dilute, if not dissolve, the fundamental duties imposed by the doctrine and to undermine its essential purpose of assuring patient participation in medical decision making (1).

Case Study of the Medical Decision-Making System ETL Abnormalities Processing Procedure

2012 ◽  
Vol 433-440 ◽  
pp. 894-899
Author(s):  
Hui Chen Tsai ◽  
Kuo Chung Lin ◽  
Ching Long Yeh
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Medical Decision Making ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Process Data ◽  
Customer Complaint ◽  
Decision Making System ◽  
Restoration Mechanism ◽  
Data Content ◽  
Content System

The primary purpose of this research is to resolve the problem of ETL operation failure in execution of ETL (Extraction, Transformation and Loading) by the medical decision-making system due to data content, system factors and defective program design, thereby affect online daily operation of the application system and even customer complaint. This research first research and develop how to record in database, whether successful or not, the number of ETL file conversion program (including tool and self-wrote PL/SQL program) execution process, data status, and execution time; followed by designing control mechanism and write Script for voluminous table restoration for automatic execution by the system; afterwards followed by research and develop system automatic execution of restoration to stop only the affected application programs of the table and design a restoration mechanism. Lastly, through verification, this R&D result would correctly restore the data and table required by ETL procedure.

The use of health-related quality-of-life data to support medical decision making

2003 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. D8 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Osoba ◽  
Mirjam Sprangers ◽  
Kathleen Wyrwich ◽  
Donald Patrick ◽  
Larry Gorkin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Medical Decision Making ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Health Related Quality ◽  
Life Data ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Health Related

scholarly journals Development and Evaluation of a Crowdsourcing Platform for Education and Evidence-Based Medical Decision-Making

2019 ◽  
Vol 43 (1 suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 513-524
Author(s):  
Álisson Oliveira dos Santos ◽  
Alexandre Sztajnberg ◽  
Tales Mota Machado ◽  
Daniel Magalhães Nobre ◽  
Adriano Neves de Paula e Souza ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Medical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Evaluation Process ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Alternative Form ◽  
Evidence Based

ABSTRACT The medical education for clinical decision-making has undergone changes in recent years. Previously supported by printed material, problem solving in clinical practice has recently been aided by digital tools known as summaries platforms. Doctors and medical students have been using such tools from questions found in practice scenarios. These platforms have the advantage of high-quality, evidence-based and always up-to-date content. Its popularization was mainly due to the rise of the internet use and, more recently, of mobile devices such as tablets and smartphones, facilitating their use in clinical practice. Despite this platform is widely available, the most of them actually present several access barriers as costs, foreign language and not be able to Brazilian epidemiology. A free national platform of evidence-based medical summaries was proposed, using the crowdsourcing concept to resolve those barriers. Furthermore, concepts of gamification and content evaluation were implemented. Also, there is the possibility of evaluation by the users, who assigns note for each content created. The platform was built with modern technological tools and made available for web and mobile application. After development, an evaluation process was conducted by researchers to attest to the valid of content, usability, and user satisfying. Consolidated questionnaires and evaluation tools by the literature were applied. The process of developing the digital platform fostered interdisciplinarity, from the involvement of medical and information technology professionals. The work also allowed the reflection on the innovative educational processes, in which the learning from real life problems and the construction of knowledge in a collaborative way are integrated. The assessment results suggest that platform can be real alternative form the evidence-based medical decision-making.

Importance Hierarchy of Surrogate Medical Decision Making Determinants: A Q-Methodology Study in Middle Eastern and East Asian Men

2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (8) ◽  
pp. 1020-1033
Author(s):  
Muhammad M. Hammami ◽  
Kafa Abuhdeeb ◽  
Areej Al Balkhi
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Q Methodology ◽  
Medical Decision Making ◽  
Middle Eastern ◽  
East Asian ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Norm Perception ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Surrogate Decision ◽  
Fixed Distribution

Background Factors other than patient’s preference may influence surrogate medical decision making in a culture- and viewpoint-dependent way. We explored the importance hierarchy of potential surrogate medical decision making determinants to Middle-Eastern (ME) and East-Asian (EA) men according to their norm-perception (N-viewpoint), preference as patients (P-viewpoint), and preference as surrogate decision-makers (S-viewpoint). Methods Each respondent (120 ME, 120 EA) sorted 28 items reflecting potential determinants into a fixed distribution of importance hierarchy according to the three viewpoints. Latent decision making models were explored by by-person factor analysis (Q-methodology). Results Six models were identified for each ME and EA viewpoint (total 36). Patient’s health-related, patient’s preference-related, and society’s interests-related determinants were strongly embraced in 34, 3, and zero models and strongly discounted in 2, 5, and 21 models, respectively. Patient’s religious/spiritual belief was strongly embraced in 6 EA models compared to 2 ME models and strongly discounted in 2 EA models compared to 5 ME models. Further, family-centric and surrogate’s interest-related determinants were strongly embraced in 8 EA models compared to 1 ME model. They were also strongly embraced in 5 P-viewpoint compared to 2 S-viewpoint models and strongly discounted in 4 P-viewpoint compared to 11 S-viewpoint models. Despite the overall predominance of patient’s health-related determinants and culture- and viewpoint-dependent differences, Q-methodology analysis identified relatively patient’s preference-influenced, religious/spiritual beliefs–influenced, emotion-influenced, and familism-influenced models and showed notable overlap in models. Conclusions Patient’s health was more important than other potential medical surrogate decision making determinants, including patient’s preference, for both ME and EA men and in all viewpoints. The relative importance of some determinants was culture- and viewpoint- dependent and allowed description of different albeit overlapping models.

Language changes medical judgments and beliefs

2021 ◽  
pp. 136700692110228
Author(s):  
Sayuri Hayakawa ◽  
Yue Pan ◽  
Viorica Marian
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Second Language ◽  
Medical Decision Making ◽  
Psychological Impact ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Medical Conditions ◽  
Substantial Impact ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Experimental Treatments

Aims and objectives: How health risks are communicated can have a substantial impact on medical judgments and choice. Here, we examine whether the language used to process health-related information systematically changes bilinguals’ perceptions and preferences. Methodology: Chinese-English bilinguals were presented with 10 medical scenarios in either their native language (Mandarin Chinese; n = 76) or a second language (American English; n = 84) and made judgments regarding their familiarity with the medical conditions and the perceived severity of the possible symptoms (incurability, emotional distress, physical pain, social harm). Participants then rated their agreement with statements pertaining to beliefs about medical decision-making (trust in the good intentions of doctors, acceptability of challenging doctors, importance of involving family, preference for standard treatments, preference for experimental treatments). Data and analysis: Linear mixed-effects models were constructed for judgments of medical conditions and for beliefs regarding medical decision-making. Findings and conclusions: Medical conditions were perceived to be easier to cure, less physically painful, and less emotionally distressing when processed in the second language, English. Using English also increased endorsement of beliefs (such as challenging doctors’ opinions and accepting experimental treatments) that were more consistent with individualistic than with collectivistic norms. We propose that the activation of emotions and values is linked to language, with consequences for how individuals make decisions that impact their health and well-being. Originality: The present study is among the first to systematically examine the interactive psychological impact of language context and experience on judgments and beliefs in an applied medical domain. Significance: With millions of practitioners and patients worldwide making medical decisions in a combination of native and non-native languages, the present findings highlight the need to account for language, including language use, context, and experience, in order to optimize health-related communication and judgments.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document