Petersen, Carolyn

The application of digital interventions in healthcare beyond research has been translated in the development of software as a medical device. Along with corresponding regulations for medical devices, there is a need for assessing adverse events to conduct post-market surveillance and to appropriately label digital health interventions to ensure proper use and patient safety. To date unexpected consequences of digital health interventions are neglected or ignored, or at least remain undescribed in literature. This paper is intended to raise awareness across the research community about these upcoming challenges. We recommend that - together with developing a new research field of digitalovigilance - a systematic assessment and monitoring of adverse events and unexpected interactions be included in clinical trials, along with the reporting of such events and the conduct of meta-analyses on critical aspects.

Abstract Telehealth is a broad concept that refers to any delivery of health care in real time using technologies to connect people or information that are not in the same physical location. Until fairly recently, telehealth was more aspiration than reality. This situation changed radically due in part to the COVID-19 pandemic, which led to a near-overnight inability for patients to be seen for routine management of chronic health conditions, including those with cancer. The purpose of this brief narrative review is to outline some areas where emerging and future technology may allow for innovations with specific implications for people with a current or past diagnosis of cancer, including underserved and/or historically excluded populations. Specific topics of telehealth are broadly covered in other areas of the special issue.

Objective: To identify links between Participatory Health Informatics (PHI) and the One Digital Health framework (ODH) and to show how PHI could be used as a catalyst or contributor to ODH. Methods: We have analyzed the addressed topics within the ODH framework in previous IMIA Yearbook contributions from our working group during the last 10 years. We have matched main themes with the ODH's framework three perspectives (individual health and wellbeing, population and society, and ecosystem). Results: PHI catalysts ODH individual health and wellbeing perspective by providing a more comprehensive view on human health, attitudes, and relations between human health and animal health. Integration of specific behavior change techniques or gamification strategies in digital solutions are effective to change behaviors which address the P5 paradigm. PHI supports the population and society perspective through the engagement of the various stakeholders in healthcare. At the same time, PHI might increase a risk for health inequities due to technologies inaccessible to all equally and challenges associated with this. PHI is a catalyst for the ecosystem perspective by contributing data into the digital health data ecosystem allowing for analysis of interrelations between the various data which in turn might provide links among all components of the healthcare ecosystem. Conclusion: Our results suggest that PHI can and will involve topics relating to ODH. As the ODH concept crystalizes and becomes increasingly influential, its themes will permeate and become embedded in PHI even more. We look forward to these developments and co-evolution of the two frameworks.

People with disabilities (PWDs) experience worse health outcomes than people who do not have disabilities. Making meaningful progress on disability equity requires new ways of thinking about disability, new tools and processes, and new ways of working within the existing health care system. Immediate actions to increase disability equity include expanded data collection including patient-reported outcomes measures, more transparent, person-centered data governance and management, integration of public health and clinic-based health data, and renewed efforts to communicate with and treat PWDs with respect. Prevention of threats to realization of disability equity including a resurgence in the practice of eugenics, misuse of emerging technologies such as CRISPR, and surveillance-promoting technologies also are critical.

Abstract Background Technological improvements and, subsequently, the federal 21st Century Cures Act have resulted in increased access to and interoperability of electronic protected health information (ePHI). These not only have many benefits, but also have created unique challenges for privacy and confidentiality for adolescent patients. The inability to granularly protect sensitive data and a lack of standards have resulted in limited confidentiality protection and inequitable access to health information. Objectives This study aimed to understand the challenges to safe, equitable access, and interoperability of ePHI for adolescents and to identify strategies that have been developed, ongoing needs, and work in progress. Methods Shift, a national task force formalized in 2020, is a group of more than 200 expert stakeholder members working to improve functionality to standardize efforts to granularly identify and protect sensitive ePHI to promote equitable interoperability. Results Shift has created high-priority clinical use cases and organized challenges into the areas of Standards and Terminology; Usability and Implementation; and Ethics, Legal, and Policy. Conclusion Current technical standards and value sets of terminology for sensitive data have been immature and inconsistent. Shift, a national diverse working group of stakeholders, is addressing challenges inherent in the protection of privacy and confidentiality for adolescent patients. The diversity of expertise and perspectives has been essential to identify and address these challenges.

Objective People with disabilities (PWDs) are at greater risk of COVID-19 infection, complications, and death, and experience more difficulty accessing care. We analyzed Twitter tweets to identify important topics and investigate health policies’ effects on PWDs. Methods Twitter's application programming interface was used to access its public COVID-19 stream. English-language tweets from January 2020 to January 2022 containing a combination of keywords related to COVID-19, disability, discrimination, and inequity were collected and refined to exclude duplicates, replies, and retweets. The remaining tweets were analyzed for user demographics, content, and long-term availability. Results The collection yielded 94,814 tweets from 43,296 accounts. During the observation period, 1068 (2.5%) accounts were suspended and 1088 (2.5%) accounts were deleted. Account suspension and deletion among verified users tweeting about COVID-19 and disability were 0.13% and 0.3%, respectively. Emotions were similar among active, suspended, and deleted users, with general negative and positive emotions most common followed by sadness, trust, anticipation, and anger. The overall average sentiment for the tweets was negative. Ten of the 12 topics identified (96.8%) related to pandemic effects on PWDs; “politics that rejects and leaves the disabled, elderly, and children behind” (48.3%) and “efforts to support PWDs in the COVID crisis” (31.8%) were most common. The sample of tweets by organizations (43.9%) was higher for this topic than for other COVID-19-related topics the authors have investigated. Conclusions The primary discussion addressed how pandemic politics and policies disadvantage PWDs, older adults, and children, and secondarily expressed support for these populations. The increased level of Twitter use by organizations suggests a higher level of organization and advocacy within the disability community than in other groups. Twitter may facilitate recognition of increased harm to or discrimination against specific populations such as people living with disability during national health events.

Abstract Background Health care has evolved to support the involvement of individuals in decision making by, for example, using mobile apps and wearables that may help empower people to actively participate in their treatment and health monitoring. While the term “participatory health informatics” (PHI) has emerged in literature to describe these activities, along with the use of social media for health purposes, the scope of the research field of PHI is not yet well defined. Objective This article proposes a preliminary definition of PHI and defines the scope of the field. Methods We used an adapted Delphi study design to gain consensus from participants on a definition developed from a previous review of literature. From the literature we derived a set of attributes describing PHI as comprising 18 characteristics, 14 aims, and 4 relations. We invited researchers, health professionals, and health informaticians to score these characteristics and aims of PHI and their relations to other fields over three survey rounds. In the first round participants were able to offer additional attributes for voting. Results The first round had 44 participants, with 28 participants participating in all three rounds. These 28 participants were gender-balanced and comprised participants from industry, academia, and health sectors from all continents. Consensus was reached on 16 characteristics, 9 aims, and 6 related fields. Discussion The consensus reached on attributes of PHI describe PHI as a multidisciplinary field that uses information technology and delivers tools with a focus on individual-centered care. It studies various effects of the use of such tools and technology. Its aims address the individuals in the role of patients, but also the health of a society as a whole. There are relationships to the fields of health informatics, digital health, medical informatics, and consumer health informatics. Conclusion We have proposed a preliminary definition, aims, and relationships of PHI based on literature and expert consensus. These can begin to be used to support development of research priorities and outcomes measurements.