At-home Diagnostics and Diagnostic Excellence: Devices vs General Wellness Products

Digital measures in epilepsy in low-resourced environments

INTRODUCTION

Digital measures and digital health-care delivery have been rarely implemented in lower-and-middle-income countries (LMICs), contributing to worsening global disparities and inequities. Sustainable ways to implement and use digital approaches will help to improve time to access, management, and quality of life in persons with epilepsy, goals that remain unreachable in under-resourced communities. As under-resourced environments differ in human and economic resources, no one approach will be appropriate to all LMICs.

AREAS COVERED

Digital health and tools to monitor and measure digital endpoints and metrics of quality of life will need to be developed or adapted to the specific needs of under-resourced areas. Portable technologies may partially address the urban-rural divide. Careful delineation of stakeholders and their engagement and alignment in all efforts is critically important if these initiatives are to be successfully sustained. Privacy issues, neglected in many regions globally, must be purposefully addressed.

EXPERT OPINION

Epilepsy care in under-resourced environments has been limited by the lack of relevant technologies for diagnosis and treatment. Digital biomarkers, and investigative technological advances, may finally make it feasible to sustainably improve care delivery and ultimately quality of life including personalized epilepsy care.

Using digital technologies to diagnose in the home: recommendations from a Delphi panel

Rapid advances in digital technology have expanded the availability of diagnostic tools beyond traditional medical settings. Previously confined to clinical environments, these many diagnostic capabilities are now accessible outside the clinic. This study utilized the Delphi method, a consensus-building approach, to develop recommendations for the development and deployment of these innovative technologies. The study findings present the 29 consensus-based recommendations generated through the Delphi process, providing valuable insights and guidance for stakeholders involved in the implementation and utilization of these novel diagnostic solutions. These recommendations serve as a roadmap for navigating the complexities of integrating digital diagnostics into healthcare practice outside traditional settings like hospitals and clinics.

What Should ChatGPT Mean for Bioethics?

In the last several months, several major disciplines have started their initial reckoning with what ChatGPT and other Large Language Models (LLMs) mean for them - law, medicine, business among other professions. With a heavy dose of humility, given how fast the technology is moving and how uncertain its social implications are, this article attempts to give some early tentative thoughts on what ChatGPT might mean for bioethics. I will first argue that many bioethics issues raised by ChatGPT are similar to those raised by current medical AI - built into devices, decision support tools, data analytics, etc. These include issues of data ownership, consent for data use, data representativeness and bias, and privacy. I describe how these familiar issues appear somewhat differently in the ChatGPT context, but much of the existing bioethical thinking on these issues provides a strong starting point. There are, however, a few "new-ish" issues I highlight - by new-ish I mean issues that while perhaps not truly new seem much more important for it than other forms of medical AI. These include issues about informed consent and the right to know we are dealing with an AI, the problem of medical deepfakes, the risk of oligopoly and inequitable access related to foundational models, environmental effects, and on the positive side opportunities for the democratization of knowledge and empowering patients. I also discuss how races towards dominance (between large companies and between the U.S. and geopolitical rivals like China) risk sidelining ethics.

Should Alexa diagnose Alzheimer's?: Legal and ethical issues with at-home consumer devices

Voice-based AI-powered digital assistants, such as Alexa, Siri, and Google Assistant, present an exciting opportunity to translate healthcare from the hospital to the home. But building a digital, medical panopticon can raise many legal and ethical challenges if not designed and implemented thoughtfully. This paper highlights the benefits and explores some of the challenges of using digital assistants to detect early signs of cognitive impairment, focusing on issues such as consent, bycatching, privacy, and regulatory oversight. By using a fictional but plausible near-future hypothetical, we demonstrate why an "ethics-by-design" approach is necessary for consumer-monitoring tools that may be used to identify health concerns for their users.