Why the study?
Are there ethical challenges and potential harms associated with direct-to-consumer smartwatch-based screening for atrial fibrillation?
Are there ethical challenges and potential harms associated with direct-to-consumer smartwatch-based screening for atrial fibrillation?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Direct-to-consumer smartwatch screening for atrial fibrillation poses significant ethical concerns, including potential harm from false positives and lack of informed consent, suggesting a need for physician-guided implementation.
This analysis has shown that the use of smartwatches to detect atrial fibrillation is currently in an ethical perspective problematic. The lack of evidence and the high number of false-positive results can lead to harm. As smartwatches provide only little information about the possible consequences, informed consent cannot be assumed. Ethical implementation could be archived if doctors provide smartwatches to patients who have been shown to benefit from them. The implementation and education should be managed by the doctor.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Predel et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: