↓ Skip to main content

Mobile Phones in Research and Treatment: Ethical Guidelines and Future Directions

Overview of attention for article published in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
11 news outlets
twitter
54 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
109 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
226 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Mobile Phones in Research and Treatment: Ethical Guidelines and Future Directions
Published in
JMIR mHealth and uHealth, October 2015
DOI 10.2196/mhealth.4538
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adrian Carter, Jacki Liddle, Wayne Hall, Helen Chenery

Abstract

Mobile phones and other remote monitoring devices, collectively referred to as "mHealth," promise to transform the treatment of a range of conditions, including movement disorders, such as Parkinson's disease. In this viewpoint paper, we use Parkinson's disease as an example, although most considerations discussed below are valid for a wide variety of conditions. The ability to easily collect vast arrays of personal data over long periods will give clinicians and researchers unique insights into disease treatment and progression. These capabilities also pose new ethical challenges that health care professionals will need to manage if this promise is to be realized with minimal risk of harm. These challenges include privacy protection when anonymity is not always possible, minimization of third-party uses of mHealth data, informing patients of complex risks when obtaining consent, managing data in ways that maximize benefit while minimizing the potential for disclosure to third parties, careful communication of clinically relevant information gleaned via mHealth technologies, and rigorous evaluation and regulation of mHealth products before widespread use. Given the complex array of symptoms and differences in comfort and literacy with technology, it is likely that these solutions will need to be individualized. It is therefore critical that developers of mHealth apps engage with patients throughout the development process to ensure that the technology meets their needs. These challenges will be best met through early and ongoing engagement with patients and other relevant stakeholders.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 54 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 226 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 220 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 39 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 36 16%
Researcher 28 12%
Student > Bachelor 18 8%
Other 10 4%
Other 44 19%
Unknown 51 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 29 13%
Computer Science 28 12%
Psychology 18 8%
Social Sciences 13 6%
Other 33 15%
Unknown 66 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 113. 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 23 April 2019.
All research outputs
#366,414
of 25,307,332 outputs
Outputs from JMIR mHealth and uHealth
#54
of 2,532 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,030
of 287,135 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JMIR mHealth and uHealth
#4
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,307,332 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,532 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 287,135 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.