绘制应用程序地图:使用移动医疗应用程序的众包智能手机数据的伦理和法律问题。

IF 1.3 Q3 ETHICS
Nada Farag, Alycia Noë, Dimitri Patrinos, Ma’n H. Zawati
{"title":"绘制应用程序地图:使用移动医疗应用程序的众包智能手机数据的伦理和法律问题。","authors":"Nada Farag,&nbsp;Alycia Noë,&nbsp;Dimitri Patrinos,&nbsp;Ma’n H. Zawati","doi":"10.1007/s41649-024-00296-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>More than 5 billion people in the world own a smartphone. More than half of these have been used to collect and process health-related data. As such, the existing volume of potentially exploitable health data is unprecedentedly large and growing rapidly. Mobile health applications (apps) on smartphones are some of the worst offenders and are increasingly being used for gathering and exchanging significant amounts of personal health data from the public. This data is often utilized for health research purposes and for algorithm training. While there are advantages to utilizing this data for expanding health knowledge, there are associated risks for the users of these apps, such as privacy concerns and the protection of their data. Consequently, gaining a deeper comprehension of how apps collect and crowdsource data is crucial. To explore how apps are crowdsourcing data and to identify potential ethical, legal, and social issues (ELSI), we conducted an examination of the Apple App Store and the Google Play Store in North America and Europe to identify apps that could potentially gather health data through crowdsourcing. Subsequently, we analyzed their privacy policies, terms of use, and other related documentation to gain insights into the utilization of users’ data and the possibility of repurposing it for research or algorithm training purposes. More specifically, we reviewed privacy policies to identify clauses pertaining to the following key categories: research, data sharing, privacy/confidentiality, commercialization, and return of findings. Based on the results of these app search, we developed an App Atlas that presents apps which crowdsource data for research or algorithm training. We identified 46 apps available in the European and Canadian markets that either openly crowdsource health data for research or algorithm training or retain the legal or technical capability to do so. This app search showed an overall lack of consistency and transparency in privacy policies that poses challenges to user comprehensibility, trust, and informed consent. A significant proportion of applications presented contradictions or exhibited considerable ambiguity. For instance, the vast majority of privacy policies in the App Atlas contain ambiguous or contradictory language regarding the sharing of users’ data with third parties. This raises a number of ethico-legal concerns which will require further academic and policy attention to ensure a balance between protecting individual interests and maximizing the scientific utility of crowdsourced data. This article represents a key first step in better understanding these concerns and bringing attention to this important issue.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":44520,"journal":{"name":"Asian Bioethics Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11250705/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mapping the Apps: Ethical and Legal Issues with Crowdsourced Smartphone Data using mHealth Applications\",\"authors\":\"Nada Farag,&nbsp;Alycia Noë,&nbsp;Dimitri Patrinos,&nbsp;Ma’n H. Zawati\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s41649-024-00296-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>More than 5 billion people in the world own a smartphone. More than half of these have been used to collect and process health-related data. As such, the existing volume of potentially exploitable health data is unprecedentedly large and growing rapidly. Mobile health applications (apps) on smartphones are some of the worst offenders and are increasingly being used for gathering and exchanging significant amounts of personal health data from the public. This data is often utilized for health research purposes and for algorithm training. While there are advantages to utilizing this data for expanding health knowledge, there are associated risks for the users of these apps, such as privacy concerns and the protection of their data. Consequently, gaining a deeper comprehension of how apps collect and crowdsource data is crucial. To explore how apps are crowdsourcing data and to identify potential ethical, legal, and social issues (ELSI), we conducted an examination of the Apple App Store and the Google Play Store in North America and Europe to identify apps that could potentially gather health data through crowdsourcing. Subsequently, we analyzed their privacy policies, terms of use, and other related documentation to gain insights into the utilization of users’ data and the possibility of repurposing it for research or algorithm training purposes. More specifically, we reviewed privacy policies to identify clauses pertaining to the following key categories: research, data sharing, privacy/confidentiality, commercialization, and return of findings. Based on the results of these app search, we developed an App Atlas that presents apps which crowdsource data for research or algorithm training. We identified 46 apps available in the European and Canadian markets that either openly crowdsource health data for research or algorithm training or retain the legal or technical capability to do so. This app search showed an overall lack of consistency and transparency in privacy policies that poses challenges to user comprehensibility, trust, and informed consent. A significant proportion of applications presented contradictions or exhibited considerable ambiguity. For instance, the vast majority of privacy policies in the App Atlas contain ambiguous or contradictory language regarding the sharing of users’ data with third parties. This raises a number of ethico-legal concerns which will require further academic and policy attention to ensure a balance between protecting individual interests and maximizing the scientific utility of crowdsourced data. This article represents a key first step in better understanding these concerns and bringing attention to this important issue.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44520,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asian Bioethics Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11250705/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asian Bioethics Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s41649-024-00296-3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Bioethics Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s41649-024-00296-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

全球有超过 50 亿人拥有智能手机。其中一半以上被用于收集和处理与健康有关的数据。因此,现有可能被利用的健康数据量空前庞大,而且还在迅速增长。智能手机上的移动健康应用程序(App)是其中最严重的违规者,越来越多地用于收集和交换公众的大量个人健康数据。这些数据通常用于健康研究目的和算法训练。利用这些数据扩展健康知识固然有其优势,但对这些应用程序的用户来说也存在相关风险,如隐私问题和数据保护问题。因此,深入了解应用程序如何收集和众包数据至关重要。为了探索应用程序如何进行数据众包,并找出潜在的道德、法律和社会问题(ELSI),我们对北美和欧洲的苹果应用商店和谷歌应用商店进行了检查,以找出可能通过众包收集健康数据的应用程序。随后,我们分析了它们的隐私政策、使用条款和其他相关文档,以深入了解用户数据的使用情况以及将其重新用于研究或算法训练目的的可能性。更具体地说,我们审查了隐私政策,以确定与以下关键类别有关的条款:研究、数据共享、隐私/保密、商业化和结果返还。根据这些应用程序的搜索结果,我们开发了一个应用程序图集,展示了用于研究或算法训练的众包数据应用程序。我们在欧洲和加拿大市场上发现了 46 款应用程序,这些应用程序或公开众包健康数据用于研究或算法训练,或保留了这样做的法律或技术能力。这次应用搜索显示,隐私政策总体上缺乏一致性和透明度,这给用户的理解、信任和知情同意带来了挑战。相当一部分应用程序存在矛盾或表现出相当的模糊性。例如,App Atlas 中的绝大多数隐私政策在与第三方共享用户数据方面都使用了含糊不清或自相矛盾的语言。这引发了一系列伦理-法律问题,需要学术界和政策界进一步关注,以确保在保护个人利益和最大限度地发挥众包数据的科学效用之间取得平衡。这篇文章是更好地理解这些问题并使人们关注这一重要问题的关键性第一步:在线版本包含补充材料,可查阅 10.1007/s41649-024-00296-3。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Mapping the Apps: Ethical and Legal Issues with Crowdsourced Smartphone Data using mHealth Applications

More than 5 billion people in the world own a smartphone. More than half of these have been used to collect and process health-related data. As such, the existing volume of potentially exploitable health data is unprecedentedly large and growing rapidly. Mobile health applications (apps) on smartphones are some of the worst offenders and are increasingly being used for gathering and exchanging significant amounts of personal health data from the public. This data is often utilized for health research purposes and for algorithm training. While there are advantages to utilizing this data for expanding health knowledge, there are associated risks for the users of these apps, such as privacy concerns and the protection of their data. Consequently, gaining a deeper comprehension of how apps collect and crowdsource data is crucial. To explore how apps are crowdsourcing data and to identify potential ethical, legal, and social issues (ELSI), we conducted an examination of the Apple App Store and the Google Play Store in North America and Europe to identify apps that could potentially gather health data through crowdsourcing. Subsequently, we analyzed their privacy policies, terms of use, and other related documentation to gain insights into the utilization of users’ data and the possibility of repurposing it for research or algorithm training purposes. More specifically, we reviewed privacy policies to identify clauses pertaining to the following key categories: research, data sharing, privacy/confidentiality, commercialization, and return of findings. Based on the results of these app search, we developed an App Atlas that presents apps which crowdsource data for research or algorithm training. We identified 46 apps available in the European and Canadian markets that either openly crowdsource health data for research or algorithm training or retain the legal or technical capability to do so. This app search showed an overall lack of consistency and transparency in privacy policies that poses challenges to user comprehensibility, trust, and informed consent. A significant proportion of applications presented contradictions or exhibited considerable ambiguity. For instance, the vast majority of privacy policies in the App Atlas contain ambiguous or contradictory language regarding the sharing of users’ data with third parties. This raises a number of ethico-legal concerns which will require further academic and policy attention to ensure a balance between protecting individual interests and maximizing the scientific utility of crowdsourced data. This article represents a key first step in better understanding these concerns and bringing attention to this important issue.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
3.40%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: Asian Bioethics Review (ABR) is an international academic journal, based in Asia, providing a forum to express and exchange original ideas on all aspects of bioethics, especially those relevant to the region. Published quarterly, the journal seeks to promote collaborative research among scholars in Asia or with an interest in Asia, as well as multi-cultural and multi-disciplinary bioethical studies more generally. It will appeal to all working on bioethical issues in biomedicine, healthcare, caregiving and patient support, genetics, law and governance, health systems and policy, science studies and research. ABR provides analyses, perspectives and insights into new approaches in bioethics, recent changes in biomedical law and policy, developments in capacity building and professional training, and voices or essays from a student’s perspective. The journal includes articles, research studies, target articles, case evaluations and commentaries. It also publishes book reviews and correspondence to the editor. ABR welcomes original papers from all countries, particularly those that relate to Asia. ABR is the flagship publication of the Centre for Biomedical Ethics, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore. The Centre for Biomedical Ethics is a collaborating centre on bioethics of the World Health Organization.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信