Jeff Williams, chief operating officer of Apple, talks about the Apple Watch 4 and its ability to detect irregularities in heartbeat on Sept. 12, 2018 in Cupertino, California. Marcio Jose Sanchez/AP Photo Michael L. Millenson, Northwestern University
But out of the spotlight, the FDA has been doing away with regulatory action altogether on many diagnostic health apps targeting consumers, seeking to accelerate digital health adoption by defining many of these as “low risk” medical devices.
As the number of mobile health apps surged to a record 325,000 in 2017, app performance is going largely unpoliced, leading to what’s been dubbed a “Wild West” situation. Unfortunately for health consumers, the public can’t rely on the research community to play the role of sheriff.
When colleagues and I recently examined the medical literature on direct-to-consumer diagnostic apps in a study published in Diagnosis, we repeatedly found studies marred by bias, technological naïveté or a failure to provide crucial information for consumers. There was also a glaring lack of studies with actual consumers to see how they use these apps and what the impact on individual health, whether for better or worse, might be.
The app will see you now?
Interactive diagnostic apps now go well beyond “Dr. Google” keyword searches. They promise personalized information on whether a nagging symptom can likely be relegated to self-care or whether a visit to the doctor’s office or even the emergency room may be needed. Some of these apps become so popular that they have been downloaded tens of millions of times.
To understand whether the promising nature of these apps is backed up by the evidence, we searched both the peer-reviewed literature and nonacademic sources. The disturbing unreliability of that evidence for the average consumer is starkly visible when you consider apps that “advise” (a carefully chosen word) whether you might have skin cancer.
There are hundreds of cancer-related apps. Perhaps because melanoma rates have been rising for decades and it’s one of the most common young adult cancers, the largest group of articles we found focused on dermatology apps. One of the most prominent is Skin Scan.
If you’re a physician or reasonably savvy consumer, Google Scholar provides the easiest access to evidence-based information. One of the first results that pops up is a 2013 article entitled, “Skin Scan: A demonstration of the need for FDA regulation of medical apps on iPhone.” If that title suggests a certain lack of objectivity, the problem isn’t limited to dermatology. We also found an orthopedist examining whether a symptom checker could “guess” the right diagnosis, and an ear, nose and throat doctor investigating whether an app could diagnose his own patients as well as he could.
That Skin Scan study sounding the alarm on regulation warned of a substantial potential for harm. Yet a separate study of the same app published online two years later was much more positive. Did app developers pour in improvements, or was it that the first researchers used their own skin growth photos while the second group used the smartphone’s images?
The answer is unclear. More broadly, however, researchers often seemed unaware of the impact of basic technological distinctions such as whether an app relied on user answers to questions, “crowdsourced” answers to others or used inputs from a smartphone’s camera and sensors.
More troubling was researchers’ lack of understanding of the public’s pressing need for reliable information. So, for instance, a study of four smartphone apps found that their sensitivity in detecting malignant skin lesions ranged from 7 percent to 98 percent. Yet the researchers chose not to identify any of the apps by name. Similarly, few studies mentioned cost (CrowdMed, for example, charges users a minimum of USD$149 per month), and those that did sometimes gave only a price range for a group of apps.
With scientific evidence sparse, consumers are left to rely upon online reviews – which, as a just-published study of popular blood pressure apps warned, can be dangerously wrong.
Or there’s always a random web search.
In the case of Skin Scan, my search found that in July the company that developed the app reported a melanoma detection sensitivity of 96 percent. That “report,” however, was part of a trade publication interview with SkinVision CEO Erik de Heus as the company announced it had raised another $7.6 million from investors.
Three years ago, a National Academy of Medicine report on diagnostic error called upon professionals to direct patients to reliable online resources. However, we found that search terms used by the National Library of Medicine’s PubMed Life Sciences search engine have lagged the digital health revolution, and medical journals do a hit-or-miss job of simply indexing every app mentioned in an article. The English National Health Service has launched an Apps Library to cut through the confusion, but there’s no similar resource in this country.
Is there a way to bring some order, if not law?
Some web-savvy researchers at sites like iMedicalApps are advising physicians about apps they can use themselves or others they can trust to recommend to their patients. Others trying to bring law and order to the wide-open health app field have suggested various frameworks, such as combining stakeholders’ expertise in collaborative health app rating teams. The goal would be to get innovators, policymakers and evidence-generators to jointly help corral confusing and contradictory information.
And as the debate over using Apple Watch data to measure heart health shows, FDA approval alone doesn’t remove the risk of consumers jumping to the wrong conclusion about what the information they’re receiving actually means. Nonetheless, as the pioneering stage of health apps starts to settle into the medical mainstream, the health of the American public requires apps and devices we know we can trust.
About The Author
Michael L. Millenson, Adjunct Associate Professor of Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University
Format: Download: PDF
- This new edition of the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), used by clinicians and researchers to diagnose and classify mental disorders, is the product of more than 10 years of effort by hundreds of international experts in all aspects of mental health.
- Their dedication and hard work have yielded an authoritative volume that defines and classifies mental disorders in order to improve diagnoses, treatment, and research. This manual, which creates a common language for clinicians involved in the diagnosis of mental disorders, includes concise and specific criteria intended to facilitate an objective assessment of symptom presentations in a variety of clinical settings inpatient, outpatient, partial hospital, consultation-liaison, clinical, privat
Brand: American Psychiatric Publishing
Studio: American Psychiatric Publishing
Label: American Psychiatric Publishing
Publisher: American Psychiatric Publishing
Manufacturer: American Psychiatric Publishing
Studio: Jessica Kingsley Publishers
Label: Jessica Kingsley Publishers
Publisher: Jessica Kingsley Publishers
Manufacturer: Jessica Kingsley Publishers
This essential book shows practitioners how they can engage with teens' online lives to support their mental health. Drawing on interviews with young people it discusses how adults can have open and inquiring conversations with teens about both the positive and negative aspects of their use of online spaces.
For most young people there is no longer a barrier between their 'real' and 'online' lives. This book reviews the latest research around this topic to investigate how those working with teenagers can use their insights into digital technologies to promote wellbeing in young people. It draws extensively on interviews with young people aged 12-16 throughout, who share their views about social media and reveal their online habits. Chapters delve into how teens harness online spaces such as YouTube, Instagram and gaming platforms for creative expression and participation in public life to improve their mental health and wellbeing. It also provides a framework for practitioners to start conversations with teens to help them develop resilience in respect of their internet use. The book also explores key risks such as bullying and online hate, social currency and the quest for 'likes', sexting, and online addiction.
This is essential reading for teachers, school counsellors, social workers, and CAMHS professionals (from psychiatrists to mental health nurses) - in short, any practitioner working with teenagers around mental health.
Studio: Libraries Unlimited
Label: Libraries Unlimited
Publisher: Libraries Unlimited
Manufacturer: Libraries Unlimited
How can your library―and your patrons―benefit from mobile apps? This guidebook offers a solid foundation in "app-literacy," supplying librarians with the knowledge to review and recommend apps, offer workshops, and become the app expert for their communities.
• Describes the most important, high-quality mobile apps in specific topic areas of interest to librarians
• Provides examples of how these apps are useful for education, creativity, and productivity for all types of users, including those with special needs
• Supplies a detailed checklist of what information to include when reviewing apps
• Includes an extensive resource guide to books, blogs, websites, courses, and other sources for keeping up with mobile apps
• Provides notes on app functionality, features, price, and developer as well as any pertinent limitations