↓ Skip to main content

The use of self-quantification systems for personal health information: big data management activities and prospects

Overview of attention for article published in Health Information Science and Systems, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#22 of 103)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
77 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
210 Mendeley
Title
The use of self-quantification systems for personal health information: big data management activities and prospects
Published in
Health Information Science and Systems, February 2015
DOI 10.1186/2047-2501-3-s1-s1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Manal Almalki, Kathleen Gray, Fernando Martin Sanchez

Abstract

Self-quantification is seen as an emerging paradigm for health care self-management. Self-quantification systems (SQS) can be used for tracking, monitoring, and quantifying health aspects including mental, emotional, physical, and social aspects in order to gain self-knowledge. However, there has been a lack of a systematic approach for conceptualising and mapping the essential activities that are undertaken by individuals who are using SQS in order to improve health outcomes. In this paper, we propose a new model of personal health information self-quantification systems (PHI-SQS). PHI-SQS model describes two types of activities that individuals go through during their journey of health self-managed practice, which are 'self-quantification' and 'self-activation'. In this paper, we aimed to examine thoroughly the first type of activity in PHI-SQS which is 'self-quantification'. Our objectives were to review the data management processes currently supported in a representative set of self-quantification tools and ancillary applications, and provide a systematic approach for conceptualising and mapping these processes with the individuals' activities. We reviewed and compared eleven self-quantification tools and applications (Zeo Sleep Manager, Fitbit, Actipressure, MoodPanda, iBGStar, Sensaris Senspod, 23andMe, uBiome, Digifit, BodyTrack, and Wikilife), that collect three key health data types (Environmental exposure, Physiological patterns, Genetic traits). We investigated the interaction taking place at different data flow stages between the individual user and the self-quantification technology used. We found that these eleven self-quantification tools and applications represent two major tool types (primary and secondary self-quantification systems). In each type, the individuals experience different processes and activities which are substantially influenced by the technologies' data management capabilities. Self-quantification in personal health maintenance appears promising and exciting. However, more studies are needed to support its use in this field. The proposed model will in the future lead to developing a measure for assessing the effectiveness of interventions to support using SQS for health self-management (e.g., assessing the complexity of self-quantification activities, and activation of the individuals).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 210 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 1%
Canada 2 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Thailand 1 <1%
Unknown 201 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 39 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 36 17%
Student > Bachelor 27 13%
Researcher 20 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 14 7%
Other 38 18%
Unknown 36 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 38 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 33 16%
Social Sciences 16 8%
Psychology 13 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 12 6%
Other 51 24%
Unknown 47 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 October 2016.
All research outputs
#4,813,696
of 25,360,284 outputs
Outputs from Health Information Science and Systems
#22
of 103 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,531
of 262,305 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Information Science and Systems
#2
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,360,284 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 103 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 262,305 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.