Going beyond the means: Exploring the role of bias from digital determinants of health in technologies

7Citations
Citations of this article
28Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background In light of recent retrospective studies revealing evidence of disparities in access to medical technology and of bias in measurements, this narrative review assesses digital determinants of health (DDoH) in both technologies and medical formulae that demonstrate either evidence of bias or suboptimal performance, identifies potential mechanisms behind such bias, and proposes potential methods or avenues that can guide future efforts to address these disparities. Approach Mechanisms are broadly grouped into physical and biological biases (e.g., pulse oximetry, non-contact infrared thermometry [NCIT]), interaction of human factors and cultural practices (e.g., electroencephalography [EEG]), and interpretation bias (e.g, pulmonary function tests [PFT], optical coherence tomography [OCT], and Humphrey visual field [HVF] testing). This review scope specifically excludes technologies incorporating artificial intelligence and machine learning. For each technology, we identify both clinical and research recommendations. Conclusions Many of the DDoH mechanisms encountered in medical technologies and formulae result in lower accuracy or lower validity when applied to patients outside the initial scope of development or validation. Our clinical recommendations caution clinical users in completely trusting result validity and suggest correlating with other measurement modalities robust to the DDoH mechanism (e.g., arterial blood gas for pulse oximetry, core temperatures for NCIT). Our research recommendations suggest not only increasing diversity in development and validation, but also awareness in the modalities of diversity required (e.g., skin pigmentation for pulse oximetry but skin pigmentation and sex/hormonal variation for NCIT). By increasing diversity that better reflects patients in all scenarios of use, we can mitigate DDoH mechanisms and increase trust and validity in clinical practice and research.

References Powered by Scopus

Definitions for sepsis and organ failure and guidelines for the use of innovative therapies in sepsis

8046Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

An Official ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT Statement: Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: Evidence-based guidelines for diagnosis and management

6171Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Global strategy for the diagnosis, management, and prevention of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease GOLD executive summary

4200Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

A scoping review and expert consensus on digital determinants of health

2Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Telemedicine in Cancer Rehabilitation: Applications and Opportunities Across the Cancer Care Continuum

2Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Digital determinants of health: Editorial

2Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Charpignon, M. L., Carrel, A., Jiang, Y., Kwaga, T., Cantada, B., Hyslop, T., … Wong, A. K. I. (2023, October 1). Going beyond the means: Exploring the role of bias from digital determinants of health in technologies. PLOS Digital Health. Public Library of Science. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pdig.0000244

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 4

44%

Researcher 4

44%

Lecturer / Post doc 1

11%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 3

38%

Engineering 2

25%

Psychology 2

25%

Computer Science 1

13%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Social Media
Shares, Likes & Comments: 22

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free