Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40661656›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in digital health2025

Self-monitoring of health - user viewpoints on gathering data using consumer health technologies during leisure time.

Nora Weinberger, Martina F Baumann, Maria Maia

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Nora WeinbergerInstitute for Technology Assessment and Systems Analysis, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany.
Martina F BaumannInstitute for Technology Assessment and Systems Analysis, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany.
Maria MaiaInstitute for Technology Assessment and Systems Analysis, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Consumer Health Technologies (CHTs), including wearables and brain-activity monitoring devices, are increasingly integrated into everyday life, extending beyond clinical settings into leisure activities. Yet, their ethical and social implications, especially in unregulated, non-clinical contexts, remain underexplored. Methods: This qualitative study examines how individuals perceive and engage with CHTs by combining guided interviews and pre-interview questionnaires. It focuses on attitudes toward health data collection, data sharing, privacy concerns, and the use of EEG-supported devices. Results: Findings reveal a complex landscape of trust and concern. While participants generally favored sharing data with research institutions over corporations or insurers, they were skeptical about broad consent models. Some acknowledged potential health benefits of CHTs and EEG-supported technologies, but also expressed concerns about data security, behavioral pressure, and the normalization of self-optimization. Discussion: The results underscore the need to center user perspectives in the development of CHTs, to promote transparent and context-sensitive privacy policies, and to anticipate ethical implications. In particular, the article argues for ethical frameworks to guide the use of EEG-supported technologies in everyday settings, ensuring alignment with societal values and equitable access to digital health benefits.

Indexed as

brain-activity monitoring devicesconsumer health technologiesdigital healthtechnology assessmenttechnology ethicsuser perspectiveswearables

Identifiers

PMID40661656
PMCPMC12256457

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.