Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33428016›Full record

ArticleHealth care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy2021

Prospective Intention-Based Lifestyle Contracts: mHealth Technology and Responsibility in Healthcare.

Emily Feng-Gu, Jim Everett, Rebecca C H Brown, Hannah Maslen, Justin Oakley, Julian Savulescu

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Emily Feng-GuNursing and Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. emilyfenggu@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7354-0580
Jim EverettUehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2801-5426
Rebecca C H BrownUehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8023-1092
Hannah MaslenUehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3132-8119
Justin OakleyMonash Bioethics Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3609-0020
Julian SavulescuUehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1691-6403
University of Oxford · GBMonash University · AUWellcome Centre for Ethics and Humanities · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust 104848Wellcome Trust 104848/Z/14/ZWellcome Trust 203132Wellcome Trust Grant Number [PI Savulescu WT104848/Z/14/Z]
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As the rising costs of lifestyle-related diseases place increasing strain on public healthcare systems, the individual's role in disease may be proposed as a healthcare rationing criterion. Literature thus far has largely focused on retrospective responsibility in healthcare. The concept of prospective responsibility, in the form of a lifestyle contract, warrants further investigation. The responsibilisation in healthcare debate also needs to take into account innovative developments in mobile health technology, such as wearable biometric devices and mobile apps, which may change how we hold others accountable for their lifestyles. Little is known about public attitudes towards lifestyle contracts and the use of mobile health technology to hold people responsible in the context of healthcare. This paper has two components. Firstly, it details empirical findings from a survey of 81 members of the United Kingdom general public on public attitudes towards individual responsibility and rationing healthcare, prospective and retrospective responsibility, and the acceptability of lifestyle contracts in the context of mobile health technology. Secondly, we draw on the empirical findings and propose a model of prospective intention-based lifestyle contracts, which is both more aligned with public intuitions and less ethically objectionable than more traditional, retrospective models of responsibility in healthcare.

Indexed as

IntentionTelemedicineBiomedical TechnologyDelivery of Health CareHumansLife StyleProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesHealthcareLifestyle contractmHealthResource allocationResponsibility

Identifiers

PMID33428016
PMCPMC8321967
OpenAlexW3097817737

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.