Investigation of wearable health tracker version updates.
Fitness Trackers
Software Engineering
Software Validation
Wearable Electronic Devices
Journal
BMJ health & care informatics
ISSN: 2632-1009
Titre abrégé: BMJ Health Care Inform
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101745500
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2019
Oct 2019
Historique:
received:
03
06
2019
revised:
29
08
2019
accepted:
16
09
2019
entrez:
11
10
2019
pubmed:
11
10
2019
medline:
14
4
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Wearable fitness trackers are increasingly used in healthcare applications; however, the frequent updating of these devices is at odds with traditional medical device practices. Our objective was to explore the nature and frequency of wearable tracker updates recorded in device changelogs, to reveal the chronology of updates and to estimate the intervals where algorithm updates could impact device validations. Updates for devices meeting selection criteria (that included their use in clinical trials) were independently labelled by four researchers according to simple function and specificity schema. Device manufacturers have diverse approaches to update reporting and changelog practice. Visual representations of device changelogs reveal the nature and chronology of device iterations. 13% of update items were unspecified and 32% possibly affected validations with as few as 5 days between updates that may affect validation. Manufacturers could aid researchers and health professionals by providing more informative device update changelogs.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Wearable fitness trackers are increasingly used in healthcare applications; however, the frequent updating of these devices is at odds with traditional medical device practices.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
Our objective was to explore the nature and frequency of wearable tracker updates recorded in device changelogs, to reveal the chronology of updates and to estimate the intervals where algorithm updates could impact device validations.
METHOD
METHODS
Updates for devices meeting selection criteria (that included their use in clinical trials) were independently labelled by four researchers according to simple function and specificity schema.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Device manufacturers have diverse approaches to update reporting and changelog practice. Visual representations of device changelogs reveal the nature and chronology of device iterations. 13% of update items were unspecified and 32% possibly affected validations with as few as 5 days between updates that may affect validation.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Manufacturers could aid researchers and health professionals by providing more informative device update changelogs.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31597642
pii: bmjhci-2019-100083
doi: 10.1136/bmjhci-2019-100083
pmc: PMC7062347
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.
Références
Sensors (Basel). 2019 Apr 10;19(7):
pubmed: 30974755
BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med. 2016 Apr 25;2(1):e000106
pubmed: 27900173
Br J Sports Med. 2020 Mar;54(6):332-340
pubmed: 30194221
J Med Internet Res. 2018 Mar 22;20(3):e110
pubmed: 29567635
Sleep Med Rev. 2018 Aug;40:151-159
pubmed: 29395985
BMC Med. 2015 Apr 09;13:77
pubmed: 25889598
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2016 Jan 27;4(1):e7
pubmed: 26818775