ReviewDigital health
User types, psycho-social effects and societal trends related to the use of consumer health technologies.
Review in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Consumer-oriented (wearable) sleep technology: a systematic SWOT analysis and recommendations for athletes and fitness enthusiasts.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Pooled it
- Self-monitoring of health - user viewpoints on gathering data using consumer health technologies during leisure time.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
- Wearable Sensors in Other Medical Domains with Application Potential for Orthopedic Trauma Surgery-A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- The double-edged sword of self-tracking: investigating factors of technostress in performance-oriented cycling and triathlon.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2024Article
- Educating the healthcare workforce of the future: lessons learned from the development and implementation of a 'Wearables in Healthcare' course.NPJ digital medicine · 2023Review
- Ladders to better health? Identifying the cognitive pathways and barriers to value attainment in wearable health device usage.Digital healthArticle
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The term consumer health technologies we use in this paper refers to fitness and health apps, wearables and other self-tracking devices that collect health-related data. Our paper aims to bridge the gap between the growing literature base of sociological research and ethical reflection on the (non-intended) effects of consumer health technology use on the psycho-social level, such as stress, responsibilization or a loss of intuitive sense for signs of health or illness. Special consideration should be given to vulnerable individuals, as the positive and negative effects of consumer health technology use may be unequally distributed. This perspective may help to guide policymaking and the responsible development of consumer health technologies. Methods: Using a narrative review approach, we refer to empirical and theoretical studies dealing with user types and effects related to the use of consumer health technologies. We provide an overview of consumer health technology user typologies and evidence of the unintended psycho-social effects of consumer health technology use. On this basis, we propose a user typology that may serve as a future tool for ethical reflection on negative side effects. Results: Evidence of the potential negative side effects of consumer health technology use, as presented in the literature, is inconclusive due to the high diversity of consumer health technology users and the way they use consumer health technologies. Our proposed user typology aims to more comprehensively document the diversity of users by incorporating the way in which users identify with and use their self-tracked data, attitudes towards the new technology and social interactions via consumer health technologies, and the purpose and self-determinedness of consumer health technology use. Conclusions: More systematic and quantitative empirical research on the effects of consumer health technology use in diverse settings and with diverse user types is necessary to inform public health policy. In addition to evidence-based certification of medical consumer health technologies, more practical and flexible ways to protect users from side effects may have to be developed and adopted, especially regarding the increasing number of non-medical consumer health technologies.
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.