ArticleBMC medical ethics2017
Smart homes, private homes? An empirical study of technology researchers' perceptions of ethical issues in developing smart-home health technologies.
Article in BMC medical ethics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
24 citing papers in PubMed.
- Using a Proactive Telecare System to Support Independence, Health, and Well-Being in Older Adults: Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR formative research · 2025Trial
- Mapping Ethical Blind Spots in the Use of New Technologies to Support Elder Care.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2026Article
- Ethics at the Intersection of Intelligent Assistive Technology, Ageing, and the Home Environment: A Scoping Review.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2026Article
- "I had eyes on me to help me": a qualitative descriptive study on trust in passive monitoring systems among older adults with mild cognitive impairment.The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences · 2026Article
- Misalignments of values and preferences: Finding an ideal elder care arrangement.Journal of medical ethics · 2026Article
- Distance caregiving using smart home technologies: balancing ethical priorities in family decision-making by only children.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- Understanding how, for whom and under what circumstances telecare can support independence in community-dwelling older adults: a realist review.BMC geriatrics · 2025Review
- Patient and Public Involvement in Technology-Related Dementia Research: Scoping Review.JMIR aging · 2024Article
- Remote Technologies and Filial Obligations at a Distance: New Opportunities and Ethical Challenges.Asian bioethics review · 2023Article
- Perceptions of mental health services among the children who are in conflict with the law in Jammu and Kashmir.Global mental health (Cambridge, England) · 2023Article
- Evidence and User Considerations of Home Health Monitoring for Older Adults: Scoping Review.JMIR aging · 2022Article
- Usage and impact of the internet-of-things-based smart home technology: a quality-of-life perspective.Universal access in the information society · 2022Article
- Older Adults' Perspectives of Smart Technologies to Support Aging at Home: Insights from Five World Café Forums.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Scoping Review of the Literature on Smart Healthcare for Older Adults.Yonsei medical journal · 2022Article
- "A Question of Trust" and "a Leap of Faith"-Study Participants' Perspectives on Consent, Privacy, and Trust in Smart Home Research: Qualitative Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2021Article
- An Overview of Sensors, Design and Healthcare Challenges in Smart Homes: Future Design Questions.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Multimodal Classification of Parkinson's Disease in Home Environments with Resiliency to Missing Modalities.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Smart moves for an aging population.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2021Article
- Article
- Remote Monitoring of Critically-Ill Post-Surgical Patients: Lessons from a Biosensor Implementation Trial.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSmart-home technologies, comprising environmental sensors, wearables and video are attracting interest in home healthcare delivery. Development of such technology is usually justified on the basis of the technology's potential to increase the autonomy of people living with long-term conditions. Studies of the ethics of smart-homes raise concerns about privacy, consent, social isolation and equity of access. Few studies have investigated the ethical perspectives of smart-home engineers themselves. By exploring the views of engineering researchers in a large smart-home project, we sought to contribute to dialogue between ethics and the engineering community.
methodsEither face-to-face or using Skype, we conducted in-depth qualitative interviews with 20 early- and mid-career smart-home researchers from a multi-centre smart-home project, who were asked to describe their own experience and to reflect more broadly about ethical considerations that relate to smart-home design. With participants' consent, interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using a thematic approach.
resultsTwo overarching themes emerged: in 'Privacy', researchers indicated that they paid close attention to negative consequences of potential unauthorised information sharing in their current work. However, when discussing broader issues in smart-home design beyond the confines of their immediate project, researchers considered physical privacy to a lesser extent, even though physical privacy may manifest in emotive concerns about being watched or monitored. In 'Choice', researchers indicated they often saw provision of choice to end-users as a solution to ethical dilemmas. While researchers indicated that choices of end-users may need to be restricted for technological reasons, ethical standpoints that restrict choice were usually assumed and embedded in design.
conclusionsThe tractability of informational privacy may explain the greater attention that is paid to it. However, concerns about physical privacy may reduce acceptability of smart-home technologies to future end-users. While attention to choice suggests links with privacy, this may misidentify the sources of privacy and risk unjustly burdening end-users with problems that they cannot resolve. Separating considerations of choice and privacy may result in more satisfactory treatment of both. Finally, through our engagement with researchers as participants this study demonstrates the relevance of (bio)ethics as a critical partner to smart-home engineering.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.