The ethical dimension of personal health monitoring in the armed forces: a scoping review.
Military
Moral
Responsibility
Utilitarian
Value conflicts
Journal
BMC medical ethics
ISSN: 1472-6939
Titre abrégé: BMC Med Ethics
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088680
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 Aug 2024
10 Aug 2024
Historique:
received:
13
06
2024
accepted:
01
08
2024
medline:
11
8
2024
pubmed:
11
8
2024
entrez:
10
8
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Personal Health Monitoring (PHM) has the potential to enhance soldier health outcomes. To promote morally responsible development, implementation, and use of PHM in the armed forces, it is important to be aware of the inherent ethical dimension of PHM. In order to improve the understanding of the ethical dimension, a scoping review of the existing academic literature on the ethical dimension of PHM was conducted. Four bibliographical databases (Ovid/Medline, Embase.com, Clarivate Analytics/Web of Science Core Collection, and Elsevier/SCOPUS) were searched for relevant literature from their inception to June 1, 2023. Studies were included if they sufficiently addressed the ethical dimension of PHM and were related to or claimed relevance for the military. After selection and extraction, the data was analysed using a qualitative thematic approach. A total of 9,071 references were screened. After eligibility screening, 19 articles were included for this review. The review identifies and describes three categories reflecting the ethical dimension of PHM in the military: (1) utilitarian considerations, (2) value-based considerations, and (3) regulatory responsibilities. The four main values that have been identified as being of concern are those of privacy, security, trust, and autonomy. This review demonstrates that PHM in the armed forces is primarily approached from a utilitarian perspective, with a focus on its benefits, without explicit critical deliberation on PHM's potential moral downsides. Also, the review highlights a significant research gap with a specific lack of empirical studies focussing specifically on the ethical dimension of PHM. Awareness of the inherent ethical dimension of PHM in the military, including value conflicts and how to balance them, can help to contribute to a morally responsible development, implementation, and use of PHM in the armed forces.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Personal Health Monitoring (PHM) has the potential to enhance soldier health outcomes. To promote morally responsible development, implementation, and use of PHM in the armed forces, it is important to be aware of the inherent ethical dimension of PHM. In order to improve the understanding of the ethical dimension, a scoping review of the existing academic literature on the ethical dimension of PHM was conducted.
METHODS
METHODS
Four bibliographical databases (Ovid/Medline, Embase.com, Clarivate Analytics/Web of Science Core Collection, and Elsevier/SCOPUS) were searched for relevant literature from their inception to June 1, 2023. Studies were included if they sufficiently addressed the ethical dimension of PHM and were related to or claimed relevance for the military. After selection and extraction, the data was analysed using a qualitative thematic approach.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 9,071 references were screened. After eligibility screening, 19 articles were included for this review. The review identifies and describes three categories reflecting the ethical dimension of PHM in the military: (1) utilitarian considerations, (2) value-based considerations, and (3) regulatory responsibilities. The four main values that have been identified as being of concern are those of privacy, security, trust, and autonomy.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
This review demonstrates that PHM in the armed forces is primarily approached from a utilitarian perspective, with a focus on its benefits, without explicit critical deliberation on PHM's potential moral downsides. Also, the review highlights a significant research gap with a specific lack of empirical studies focussing specifically on the ethical dimension of PHM. Awareness of the inherent ethical dimension of PHM in the military, including value conflicts and how to balance them, can help to contribute to a morally responsible development, implementation, and use of PHM in the armed forces.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39127660
doi: 10.1186/s12910-024-01086-0
pii: 10.1186/s12910-024-01086-0
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
88Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Friedl KE. Military applications of soldier physiological monitoring. J Sci Med Sport. 2018;21(11):1147–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsams.2018.06.004 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2018.06.004
Stacey MJ, Hill N, Woods D. Physiological monitoring for healthy military personnel. J R Army Med Corps. 2018;164(4):290–2. https://doi.org/10.1136/jramc-2017-000851 .
doi: 10.1136/jramc-2017-000851
Van den Bulk S. Altijd een vinger aan de pols. Landmacht. 2019. http://magazines.defensie.nl/landmacht/2019/08/10_cde_08-2019 . Accessed 12 May 2023.
Van Haren RM, Thorson CM, Valle EJ, Busko AM, Jouria JM, Livingstone AS, et al. Novel prehospital monitor with injury acuity alarm to identify trauma patients who require lifesaving intervention. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2014;76(3):743–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/ta.0000000000000099 .
doi: 10.1097/ta.0000000000000099
Valk PJ, Veenstra BJ. Military performance and health monitoring in extreme environments. HFM-181 symposium on human performance enhancement for NATO military operations (Science, Technology and Ethics). Sofia; 2009.
Lovalekar M, Sharp MA, Billing DC, Drain JR, Nindl BC, Zambraski EJ. International consensus on military research priorities and gaps — Survey results from the 4th International Congress on Soldiers’ Physical Performance. J Sci Med Sport. 2018;21(11):1125–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsams.2018.05.028 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2018.05.028
Grandview Research. mHealth Market Size & Share, Trends Report, 2022–2030. 2022. https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/mhealth-market . Accessed 4 May 2023.
Mittelstadt B. Personal Health Monitoring. 2013.
Franssen WMA, Franssen GHLM, Spaas J, Solmi F, Eijnde BO. Can consumer wearable activity tracker-based interventions improve physical activity and cardiometabolic health in patients with chronic diseases? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2020;17(1):57. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-020-00955-2 .
doi: 10.1186/s12966-020-00955-2
Surrel G, Aminifar A, Rincón F, Murali S, Atienza D. Online Obstructive Sleep Apnea Detection on Medical Wearable Sensors. IEEE Trans Biomed Circuits Syst. 2018;12(4):762–73. https://doi.org/10.1109/TBCAS.2018.2824659 .
doi: 10.1109/TBCAS.2018.2824659
Radin JM, Wineinger NE, Topol EJ, Steinhubl SR. Harnessing wearable device data to improve state-level real-time surveillance of influenza-like illness in the USA: a population-based study. Lancet Digit Health. 2020;2(2):e85–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2589-7500(19)30222-5 .
doi: 10.1016/s2589-7500(19)30222-5
Mazilu S, Blanke U, Hardegger M, Tröster G, Gazit E, Dorfman M, et al. GaitAssist: a wearable assistant for gait training and rehabilitation in Parkinson's disease. 2014 IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communication Workshops (PERCOM WORKSHOPS). Budapest; 2014. p. 135–7. https://doi.org/10.1109/PerComW.2014.6815179 .
Moshawrab M, Adda M, Bouzouane A, Ibrahim H, Raad A. Smart Wearables for the Detection of Occupational Physical Fatigue: A Literature Review. Sensors. 2022;22(19):7472.
doi: 10.3390/s22197472
Armed Forces Health Surveillance Division. Heat Illness, Active Component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2021. http://health.mil/News/Articles/2022/04/01/Update-Ht-MSMR 2021. Accessed 18 May 2023..
Buller MJ, Delves SK, Fogarty AL, Veenstra BJ. On the real-time prevention and monitoring of exertional heat illness in military personnel. J Sci Med Sport. 2021;24(10):975–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsams.2021.04.008 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2021.04.008
Miller NL, Matsangas P, Shattuck LG. Fatigue and its effect on performance in military environments. In: Hancock PA, Szalma JL, editors. Performance Under Stress. CRC Press; 2008. p. 231–49.
Adler AB, Gunia BC, Bliese PD, Kim PY, LoPresti ML. Using actigraphy feedback to improve sleep in soldiers: an exploratory trial. Sleep Health. 2017;3(2):126–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sleh.2017.01.001 .
doi: 10.1016/j.sleh.2017.01.001
Smyth MJ, Round JA, Mellor AJ. Remote physiological monitoring in an austere environment: a future for battlefield care provision? J R Army Med Corps. 2018;164(6):410. https://doi.org/10.1136/jramc-2017-000905 .
doi: 10.1136/jramc-2017-000905
Beeler N, Roos L, Delves S, Veenstra B, Friedl K, Buller M et al. The Wearing Comfort and Acceptability of Ambulatory Physical Activity Monitoring Devices in Soldiers. IISE Transactions on Occupational Ergonomics and Human Factors. 2018:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/24725838.2018.1435431 .
Bradke BS, Miller TA, Everman B. Photoplethysmography behind the ear outperforms electrocardiogram for cardiovascular monitoring in dynamic environments. Sensors. 2021;21(13):4543.
doi: 10.3390/s21134543
Brothers MC, DeBrosse M, Grigsby CC, Naik RR, Hussain SM, Heikenfeld J, et al. Achievements and challenges for real-time sensing of Analytes in sweat within wearable platforms. Acc Chem Res. 2019;52(2):297–306. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.accounts.8b00555 .
doi: 10.1021/acs.accounts.8b00555
Bovens D, Van Baarle E, Molewijk B. Personal health monitoring in the armed forces - scouting the ethical dimension: Aa case study in the Netherlands Armed Forces during the Covid-19 pandemic. BMC Med Ethics. 2023;24(1):21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-023-00899-9 .
doi: 10.1186/s12910-023-00899-9
Gilmartin C, Arbe-Barnes EH, Diamond M, Fretwell S, McGivern E, Vlazaki M, et al. Varsity medical ethics debate 2018: constant health monitoring - the advance of technology into healthcare. Philos Ethics Humanit Med. 2018;13(1):12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13010-018-0065-0 .
doi: 10.1186/s13010-018-0065-0
Leikas J, Kulju M. Ethical consideration of home monitoring technology: A qualitative focus group study. Gerontechnology. 2018;17:38–47. https://doi.org/10.4017/gt.2018.17.1.004.00 .
doi: 10.4017/gt.2018.17.1.004.00
Anaya L, Alsadoon A, Costadopoulos N, Prasad PWC. Ethical Implications of User Perceptions of Wearable Devices. Sci Eng Ethics. 2018;24:1–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9872-8 .
doi: 10.1007/s11948-017-9872-8
Mittelstadt B. An Ethical Analysis of Personal Health Monitoring in the UK: A Case Study. ORBIT J. 2018;1(3):1–16. https://doi.org/10.29297/orbit.v1i3.69 .
doi: 10.29297/orbit.v1i3.69
Rausch M, Schaebler A, Scheid P, Kowitz S, Düking P, Sperlich B, et al. Biosensors supporting healthcare in missions - expert consensus on the status of implementation in the military and future tasks. Health Promot Phys Act. 2022;20:29–35. https://doi.org/10.55225/hppa.438 .
doi: 10.55225/hppa.438
Aromataris E, Lockwood C, Porritt K, Pilla B, Jordan Z. JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. JBI. 2024. https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIMES-24-01 .
doi: 10.46658/JBIMES-24-01
Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O’Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D, et al. PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467–73. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850 .
doi: 10.7326/M18-0850
Grames EM, Stillman AN, Tingley MW, Elphick CS. An automated approach to identifying search terms for systematic reviews using keyword co-occurrence networks. Methods Ecol Evol. 2019;10(10):1645–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.13268 .
doi: 10.1111/2041-210X.13268
Van Eck NJ, Waltman L. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics. 2010;84(2):523–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3 .
doi: 10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3
Ouzzani M, Hammady H, Fedorowicz Z, Elmagarmid A. Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2016;5(1):210. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4 .
doi: 10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4
Van de Schoot R, de Bruin J, Schram R, Zahedi P, de Boer J, Weijdema F, et al. An open source machine learning framework for efficient and transparent systematic reviews. Nature Machine Intelligence. 2021;3(2):125–33. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-020-00287-7 .
doi: 10.1038/s42256-020-00287-7
Hill CE, Knox S. Conceptual foundations of consensual qualitative research. In: Essentials of consensual qualitative research. Essentials of qualitative methods. Washington: American Psychological Association; 2021. p. 3–10.
doi: 10.1037/0000215-001
Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3:77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa .
doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372: n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71 .
doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71
Austin M. Wearables: Useful Sentinels of Our Health? Homeland Security Affairs 16, Article 15. 2020. www.hsaj.org/articles/16369 .
Winslow B, Mills E. Future of service member monitoring: the intersection of biology, wearables and artificial intelligence. BMJ Mil Health. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1136/military-2022-002306 .
doi: 10.1136/military-2022-002306
Casselman J, Onopa N, Khansa L. Wearable healthcare: Lessons from the past and a peek into the future. Telematics Inform. 2017;34(7):1011–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2017.04.011 .
doi: 10.1016/j.tele.2017.04.011
Karkazis K, Fishman JR. Tracking U.S. Professional athletes: the ethics of biometric technologies. Am J Bioeth. 2017;17(1):45–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2016.1251633 .
doi: 10.1080/15265161.2016.1251633
Ng A, Reddy M, Zalta AK, Schueller SM. Veterans’ perspectives on fitbit use in treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder: an interview study. JMIR Ment Health. 2018;5(2):e10415. https://doi.org/10.2196/10415 .
doi: 10.2196/10415
Murdock RC, Hagen JA. Soldier safety and performance through wearable devices. Micro- and Nanotechnology Sensors, Systems, and Applications X. 2018;10639:106391A. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2304899 .
Bratt S, Semaan B, Britton L, Dosono B, Zeno F. In: Translation in Personal Crises: Opportunities for Wearables Design. Albi, France: 14th ISCRAM Conference; 2017.
Kim RH, Patel MS. Barriers and opportunities for using wearable devices to increase physical activity among veterans: pilot study. JMIR Form Res. 2018;2(2):e10945. https://doi.org/10.2196/10945 .
doi: 10.2196/10945
Shore JH, Aldag M, McVeigh FL, Hoover RL, Ciulla R, Fisher A. Review of mobile health technology for military mental health. Mil Med. 2014;179(8):865–78. https://doi.org/10.7205/milmed-d-13-00429 .
doi: 10.7205/milmed-d-13-00429
Roy M, Chowdhury C, Aslam N. Security and Privacy Issues in Wireless Sensor and Body Area Networks. In: Gupta BB, Perez GM, Agrawal DP, Gupta D, editors. Handbook of Computer Networks and Cyber Security: Principles and Paradigms. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2020. p. 173–200.
doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-22277-2_7
Leightley D, Murphy D. Personalised digital technology for mental health in the armed forces: the potential, the hype and the dangers. BMJ Mil Health. 2023;169(1):81–3. https://doi.org/10.1136/military-2022-002279 .
doi: 10.1136/military-2022-002279
Mohammadian M, Alami M, Yaghoubi M, Mehdizadeh P. Factors Affecting the Use of Smart Wearables in Veterans. Iran J War Public Health. 2022;14(4):447–54.
Davison CB, Lazaros EJ, Zhao JJ, Truell AD, Bowles BB. Privacy and security considerations of the IOT: approaching privacy by design. Issues in Information Systems. 2020;21(2):57–63.
Elhoseny M, Thilakarathne NN, Alghamdi MI, Mahendran RK, Gardezi AA, Weerasinghe H, et al. Security and Privacy Issues in Medical Internet of Things: Overview, Countermeasures, Challenges and Future Directions. Sustainability. 2021;13(21):11645.
doi: 10.3390/su132111645
Sipilä E, Rauhala EL, Elo C, Nissinen J, Buruk O, Ihalainen T, et al. Technology-related challenges in smart clothing - viewpoints from ideation workshops. 2021 IEEE 9th International Conference on Serious Games and Applications for Health (SeGAH). Dubai; 2021. p. 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1109/SEGAH52098.2021.9551863 .
Kröger JL, Lutz OH-M, Müller F. What does your gaze reveal about you? On the privacy implications of eye tracking. In: Friedewald M, Önen M, Lievens E, Krenn S, Fricker S, editors. Privacy and Identity Management. Data for Better Living: AI and Privacy. Privacy and Identity 2019. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology (576). Cham: Springer; 2019. p. 226–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-42504-3_15 .
Metzger J, Jiyoung Suh J, Reid S, El Abbadi A. What can fitness apps teach us about group privacy. In: Khosrow-Pur M, editor. Research Anthology on Privatizing and Securing Data IGI Global. 2021.
Dudarev V, Barral O, Zhang C, Davis G, Enns JT. On the Reliability of Wearable Technology: A Tutorial on Measuring Heart Rate and Heart Rate Variability in the Wild. Sensors. 2023;23(13):5863.
doi: 10.3390/s23135863
Colvonen PJ, DeYoung PN, Bosompra NA, Owens RL. Limiting racial disparities and bias for wearable devices in health science research. Sleep. 2020;43(10). https://doi.org/10.1093/sleep/zsaa159 .
Merid B, Volpe V. Race Correction and Algorithmic Bias in Atrial Fibrillation Wearable Technologies. Health Equity. 2023;7(1):817–24. https://doi.org/10.1089/heq.2023.0034 .
doi: 10.1089/heq.2023.0034
Kaushal A, Altman R, Langlotz C. Geographic Distribution of US Cohorts Used to Train Deep Learning Algorithms. JAMA. 2020;324(12):1212–3. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.12067 .
doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.12067
Thomson W. Popular lectures and addresses in three volumes. Volume 1 constitution of matter. London: MacMillan and Company; 1889. p. 73–4. https://archive.org/details/popularlecturesa01kelvuoft/page/72/mode/2up .
Strath SJ, Rowley TW. Wearables for Promoting Physical Activity. Clin Chem. 2018;64(1):53–63. https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2017.272369 .
doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2017.272369
Beck RW, Riddlesworth T, Ruedy K, Ahmann A, Bergenstal R, Haller S, et al. Effect of Continuous Glucose Monitoring on Glycemic Control in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes Using Insulin Injections: The DIAMOND Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2017;317(4):371–8. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2016.19975 .
doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.19975
Patel S, Park H, Bonato P, Chan L, Rodgers M. A review of wearable sensors and systems with application in rehabilitation. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2012;9(1):21. https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-9-21 .
doi: 10.1186/1743-0003-9-21
Taylor L, Floridi L, Van der Sloot B. A new perspective on privacy. In: Taylor L, Floridi L, Van der Sloot B, editors. Group privacy: new challenges of data technologies. Cham: Springer; 2017. p. 1–12.
doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-46608-8
Mittelstadt B. From Individual to Group Privacy in Big Data Analytics. Philosophy & Technology. 2017;30(4):475–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-017-0253-7 .
doi: 10.1007/s13347-017-0253-7
Brönneke JB, Müller J, Mouratis K, Hagen J, Stern AD. Regulatory, Legal, and Market Aspects of Smart Wearables for Cardiac Monitoring. Sensors (Basel). 2021;21(14). https://doi.org/10.3390/s21144937 .
Friedman B, Kahn P, Borning A, Zhang P, Galletta D. Value Sensitive Design and Information Systems. 2006. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7844-3_4
Gerdes A, Frandsen TF. A systematic review of almost three decades of value sensitive design (VSD): what happened to the technical investigations? Ethics Inf Technol. 2023;25(2):26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-023-09700-2 .
doi: 10.1007/s10676-023-09700-2
Hendry DG, Friedman B, Ballard S. Value sensitive design as a formative framework. Ethics Inf Technol. 2021;23(1):39–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-021-09579-x .
doi: 10.1007/s10676-021-09579-x
Strikwerda L, van Steenbergen M, van Gorp A, Timmers C, van Grondelle J. The value sensitive design of a preventive health check app. Ethics Inf Technol. 2022;24(3):38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-022-09662-x .
doi: 10.1007/s10676-022-09662-x