Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39600691›Full record

ReviewGeography compass2024

Biosensing and Biosensors-Terminologies, Technologies, Theories and Ethics.

Jan Misera, Johannes Melchert, Tabea Bork-Hüffer

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Geography compass, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Jan MiseraDepartment of Geography University of Innsbruck Innsbruck Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-4090-7878
Johannes MelchertDepartment of Geography University of Innsbruck Innsbruck Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-4534-9534
Tabea Bork-HüfferDepartment of Geography University of Innsbruck Innsbruck Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6067-5817

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Which biosensing technologies are geographers using in their research, and what exactly do they measure? What are the theoretical origins of geographic interests in biosensing? This article provides an overview of the variety of biosensors applied in biosensing research, tracks the theoretical debates and roots of geographic engagement with biosensing, and discusses the potentials, limitations and ethical implications of applying biosensors. We critically reflect on the varied terminologies that have been used to describe a rapidly evolving array of biosensing technologies and methodologies and suggest a common understanding for key terms such as "biosensing" (technologies or methodologies), "biosensors," "wearable biosensors" and "biosignals." We offer an overview of the broader theoretical debates that have inspired geographers turn to biosensing, including behavioral geography, more-than-representational theory, critical neurogeography, the mobilities and biosociality paradigms, and visual geographies. These have called for methodologies that can capture affects neglected in representational research, follow people, things and technologies as they are mobile in space and time, investigate the links between brain, cognition and biopolitics or attend to visualities in everyday life. Although geographers have so far engaged with a limited number of the ever-growing variety of available (bio-)sensors, the development and application of biosensing methodologies is vibrant, highly diverse and very promising for diverse geographical research questions and fields. Going forward, we particularly encourage experimentation with eye-trackers, which come closest to measuring instantaneous responses to environmental stimuli and offer interesting opportunities for the analysis of social and material environments through the visual data they create. Finally, we conclude with a call for a stronger emphasis on data ethics, procedural ethics and ethics of care in biosensing, which have so far received too little attention in these often interdisciplinary and complex biosensing research endeavors.

Indexed as

biosensingbiosocialitycritical neurogeographiesethics of careeye‐trackingmobilities paradigmmore‐than‐representational theorieswearable biosensors

Identifiers

PMID39600691
PMCPMC11587824

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.