Martin Wiesner’s research while affiliated with Heilbronn University and other places

What is this page?


This page lists works of an author who doesn't have a ResearchGate profile or hasn't added the works to their profile yet. It is automatically generated from public (personal) data to further our legitimate goal of comprehensive and accurate scientific recordkeeping. If you are this author and want this page removed, please let us know.

Publications (44)


Functional usefulness for 19 ePA use cases (Likert scale: 1–5); n=361
Expectations regarding the ePA
Views towards using the German ePA
Reasons of non-use for participants (n=300); multiple answers could be given
Involvement in ePA introduction per user group (5-point Likert Scale: 1=no, 5=fully agree)

+1

Consumer perspectives on the national electronic health record and barriers to its adoption in Germany: does health policy require a change in communication?
  • Article
  • Full-text available

January 2025

·

21 Reads

BMC Health Services Research

·

·

Veronika Strotbaum

·

[...]

·

Martin Wiesner

Background The national health record (ePA) was introduced January 1st, 2021 in Germany and is available to every person insured under statutory health insurance. This study investigated the acceptance and expectations of the national health record in Germany, focusing on consumer perspectives, expectations, barriers, information needs, and communication aspects. Methods An exploratory, observational, cross-sectional online survey was conducted one year after ePA introduction, followed by descriptive statistical analysis. Results The top three ePA use cases were medical document collection, simplified data exchange between medical institutions, and emergency medical information. Adoption barriers included lack of information and access, privacy concerns, and perceived lack of necessity. Participants that felt informed about the ePA, reported they received information primarily from health insurances, the media, and educational or professional sources, mainly through printed brochures, social media, or via emails. Most participants (86.5%) preferred being informed through conversations, particularly with health insurance providers (81.5%) and doctors (61.0%). Written information was highly desired (94.5%), preferably via email or information letters/flyers. However, more than half of the participants (55.6%) reported being uninformed about the ePA introduction. Conclusion The study revealed a communication gap between providers and consumers, leading to a low acceptance rate of digital health technologies. Comparisons with other countries showed low adoption rates for opt-in systems. The authors suggest changing communication strategies, given users prefer direct information from doctors or health insurance companies. Adopting an opt-out system with professional social media and marketing campaigns could increase nationwide ePA adoption.

Download

Readability of English, German, and Russian Disease-Related Wikipedia Pages: Automated Computational Analysis (Preprint)

January 2022

·

6 Reads

BACKGROUND Wikipedia is a popular encyclopedia for health- and disease-related information in which patients seek advice and guidance on the web. Yet, Wikipedia articles can be unsuitable as patient education materials, as investigated in previous studies that analyzed specific diseases or medical topics with a comparatively small sample size. Currently, no data are available on the average readability levels of all disease-related Wikipedia pages for the different localizations of this particular encyclopedia. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to analyze disease-related Wikipedia pages written in English, German, and Russian using well-established readability metrics for each language. METHODS Wikipedia database snapshots and Wikidata metadata were chosen as resources for data collection. Disease-related articles were retrieved separately for English, German, and Russian starting with the main concept of Human Diseases and Disorders (German: Krankheit ; Russian: Заболевания человека ). In the case of existence, the corresponding International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10), codes were retrieved for each article. Next, the raw texts were extracted and readability metrics were computed. RESULTS The number of articles included in this study for English, German, and Russian Wikipedia was n=6127, n=6024, and n=3314, respectively. Most disease-related articles had a Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) score <50.00, signaling difficult or very difficult educational material (English: 5937/6125, 96.93%; German: 6004/6022, 99.7%; Russian: 2647/3313, 79.9%). In total, 70% (7/10) of the analyzed articles could be assigned an ICD-10 code with certainty (English: 4235/6127, 69.12%; German: 4625/6024, 76.78%; Russian: 2316/3314, 69.89%). For articles with ICD-10 codes, the mean FRE scores were 28.69 (SD 11.00), 20.33 (SD 9.98), and 38.54 (SD 13.51) for English, German, and Russian, respectively. A total of 9 English ICD-10 chapters (11 German and 10 Russian) showed significant differences: chapter F (FRE 23.88, SD 9.95; P <.001), chapter E (FRE 25.14, SD 9.88; P <.001), chapter H (FRE 30.04, SD 10.57; P =.049), chapter I (FRE 30.05, SD 9.07; P =.04), chapter M (FRE 31.17, 11.94; P <.001), chapter T (FRE 32.06, SD 10.51; P =.001), chapter A (FRE 32.63, SD 9.25; P <.001), chapter B (FRE 33.24, SD 9.07; P <.001), and chapter S (FRE 39.02, SD 8.22; P <.001). CONCLUSIONS Disease-related English, German, and Russian Wikipedia articles cannot be recommended as patient education materials because a major fraction is difficult or very difficult to read. The authors of Wikipedia pages should carefully revise existing text materials for readers with a specific interest in a disease or its associated symptoms. Special attention should be given to articles on mental, behavioral, and neurodevelopmental disorders (ICD-10 chapter F) because these articles were most difficult to read in comparison with other ICD-10 chapters. Wikipedia readers should be supported by editors providing a short and easy-to-read summary for each article.


Readability of English, German, and Russian Disease-related Wikipedia pages: Automated Computational Analysis (Preprint)

January 2022

·

42 Reads

·

4 Citations

Journal of Medical Internet Research

Background Wikipedia is a popular encyclopedia for health- and disease-related information in which patients seek advice and guidance on the web. Yet, Wikipedia articles can be unsuitable as patient education materials, as investigated in previous studies that analyzed specific diseases or medical topics with a comparatively small sample size. Currently, no data are available on the average readability levels of all disease-related Wikipedia pages for the different localizations of this particular encyclopedia. Objective This study aimed to analyze disease-related Wikipedia pages written in English, German, and Russian using well-established readability metrics for each language. Methods Wikipedia database snapshots and Wikidata metadata were chosen as resources for data collection. Disease-related articles were retrieved separately for English, German, and Russian starting with the main concept of Human Diseases and Disorders (German: Krankheit; Russian: Заболевания человека). In the case of existence, the corresponding International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10), codes were retrieved for each article. Next, the raw texts were extracted and readability metrics were computed. ResultsThe number of articles included in this study for English, German, and Russian Wikipedia was n=6127, n=6024, and n=3314, respectively. Most disease-related articles had a Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) score


Figure 1. Workflow of the processing steps and involved software components: lines with arrows indicate processing workflow for each tweet t returned by the Twitter streaming API under the given hashtags included in this study. Each t was processed in parallel by the analysis framework to reach high-throughput processing for the large volume of COVID-19-related tweets. API: application programming interface.
Figure 3. Number of tweets per day for the hashtags ranked 9-16 (see Table 2) between February 9, 2020, and April 11, 2020, on a logarithmic scale. The capital letter "A" represents the naming of the disease by the World Health Organization on February 11, 2020. Blue rectangles: No tweets were collected between February 20 and 22 as well as between March 28 and 29 due to technical issues.
Figure 5. Cumulative depiction of all tweets in European countries between February 9 and April 11, 2020. Each red dot denotes one tweet. Tweets with the same geographical information are plotted on top of each other. *No tweets were collected between February 20, 2020, and February 22, 2020, and between March 28, 2020, and March 29, 2020, due to technical issues.
Figure 6. The relative proportion of tweets with links to external resources. The capital letter "A" represents the naming of the disease by the World Health Organization on February 11, 2020. Blue rectangles: No tweets were collected between February 20 and 22 as well as between March 28 and 29 due to technical issues.
Language distribution of the study sample.
Temporal and Location Variations, and Link Categories for the Dissemination of COVID-19–Related Information on Twitter During the SARS-CoV-2 Outbreak in Europe: Infoveillance Study

August 2020

·

66 Reads

·

33 Citations

Journal of Medical Internet Research

Background: The spread of the 2019 novel coronavirus disease COVID-19 across Asia and Europe sparked a huge increase in public interest and media coverage, including social media platforms such as Twitter. In this context, the origin of information plays a central role in the dissemination of evidence-based information about the SARS-CoV-2 virus and COVID-19. On 2nd February 2020, the WHO constituted a "massive infodemic" and argued that this situation "makes it hard for people to find trustworthy sources and reliable guidance when they need it." Objective: This infoveillance study, conducted during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, focuses on the social media platform Twitter. It allows to monitor the dynamic, pandemic situation on a global scale for: different aspects and topics, languages, as well as regions and even whole countries. Of particular interest are temporal and geographical variations of COVID-19-related tweets, the situation in Europe and the categories and origin of shared external resources. Methods: Twitter's Streaming API was used to filter tweets based on sixteen prevalent hashtags related to the COVID-19 outbreak. Each tweet's text and corresponding metadata, as well as the user's profile information were extracted and stored into a database. Metadata included links to external resources. A link categorization scheme - introduced in a study by Chew and Eysenbach in 2009 - was applied onto the Top 250 shared resources to analyze the relative proportion for each category. Moreover, temporal variations of global tweet volumes were analyzed and a specific analysis was conducted for the European region. Results: Between 9th February and 11th April 2020, a total of 21,755,802 distinct tweets were collected, posted by 4,809,842 distinct Twitter accounts. The volume of #covid19 related tweets increased after the WHO announced the name of the new disease on 11th February 2020 and stabilized at the end of March at a high level. For the regional analysis, a higher tweet volume was observed in the vicinity of major European capitals, or in densely populated areas. The most frequently shared resources originated from various social media platforms (ranks 1-7). The most prevalent category in the Top 50 was "Mainstream or Local News". For the category "Government or Public Health", only two information sources were found in the Top 50: CDC (U.S.) on rank 25, and the WHO on rank 27. The first occurrence of a prevalent scientific source was Nature (rank 116). Conclusions: The naming of the disease by the WHO was a major signal to address the public audience with public health response via social media platforms, ie Twitter. Future studies should focus on the origin and trustworthiness of shared resources, as monitoring the spread of fake news during a pandemic situation is of particular importance. In addition, it would be beneficial to analyze and uncover bot networks spreading COVID-19-related misinformation. Clinicaltrial:


Temporal and Location Variations, and Link Categories for the Dissemination of COVID-19–Related Information on Twitter During the SARS-CoV-2 Outbreak in Europe: Infoveillance Study (Preprint)

April 2020

·

74 Reads

·

1 Citation

BACKGROUND The spread of the 2019 novel coronavirus disease COVID-19 across Asia and Europe sparked a huge increase in public interest and media coverage, including social media platforms such as Twitter. In this context, the origin of information plays a central role in the dissemination of evidence-based information about the SARS-CoV-2 virus and the associated COVID-19 disease. On 2nd February 2020, the WHO constituted a “massive infodemic” and argued that this situation “makes it hard for people to find trustworthy sources and reliable guidance when they need it.” OBJECTIVE This infoveillance study, conducted during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, focuses on the social media platform Twitter. The platform allows to monitor the dynamic, pandemic situation on a global scale for: different aspects and topics, languages, as well as regions and even whole countries. Of particular interest are temporal and geographical variations of COVID-19-related information, the situation in Europe and the categories and origin of shared external resources in COVID-19-related tweets. METHODS Twitter’s Streaming API was used to filter tweets based on sixteen prevalent hashtags related to the COVID-19 pandemic situation. Each tweet’s text and corresponding metadata, as well as the user’s profile information were extracted and stored into a PostgreSQL database. Metadata included links to external resources as referenced by a Twitter account. A link categorization scheme was leveraged according to a study conducted by Chew and Eysenbach in 2009. The study applied this scheme onto the Top 250 shared domains to analyze the relative proportion for each category. Moreover, temporal variations of global tweet volumes were analyzed and a specific analysis was conducted for the European region. RESULTS Between 9th February and 11th April 2020, a total of 21,755,802 distinct tweets were collected, posted by 4,809,842 distinct Twitter accounts. The volume of #covid19 related tweets increased after the WHO announced the name of the new disease on 11th February 2020 and stabilized at the end of March at a high level. For the regional analysis, a higher tweet volume was observed in the vicinity of major European capitals, or in densely populated areas. The most frequently shared resources originated from various social media platforms and were represented by the ranks 1-7. The most prevalent category in the Top 50 was “Mainstream or Local News”. For the category “Government or Public Health”, only two information sources were found in the Top 50: CDC (U.S.) on rank 25, and the WHO on rank 27. The first occurrence of a prevalent scientific source was Nature on rank 116. CONCLUSIONS The naming of the disease by the WHO was a major signal to address the public audience with public health response via social media platforms, ie Twitter. Future studies should focus on the origin and trustworthiness of shared resources, as monitoring the spread of fake news during a pandemic situation is of particular importance. In addition, it would be beneficial to analyze and uncover bot networks spreading COVID-19-related misinformation.


The Difficulty of German Information Booklets on Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis: Automated Readability and Vocabulary Analysis

February 2020

·

56 Reads

·

4 Citations

JMIR Dermatology

Background Information-seeking Psoriasis or Psoriatic Arthritis patients are confronted with numerous educational materials when looking through the internet. Literature suggests that only 17.0-21.4% (Psoriasis, Psoriatic Arthritis) of patients have a good level of knowledge about psoriasis treatment and self-management. A study from 1994 found that English Psoriasis/Psoriatic Arthritis brochures required a reading level between grades 8-12 to be understandable, which was confirmed in a follow-up study 20 years later. As readability of written health-related text material should not exceed the sixth-grade level, Psoriasis/Psoriatic Arthritis material seems to be ill-suited to its target audience. However, no data is available on the readability levels of Psoriasis/Psoriatic Arthritis brochures for German-speaking patients, and both the volume and their scope are unclear. Objective This study aimed to analyze freely available educational materials for Psoriasis/Psoriatic Arthritis patients written in German, quantifying their difficulty by assessing both the readability and the vocabulary used in the collected brochures. Methods Data collection was conducted manually via an internet search engine for Psoriasis/Psoriatic Arthritis–specific material, published as PDF documents. Next, raw text was extracted, and a computer-based readability and vocabulary analysis was performed on each brochure. For the readability analysis, we applied the Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) metric adapted for the German language, and the fourth Vienna formula (WSTF). To assess the laymen-friendliness of the vocabulary, the computation of an expert level was conducted using a specifically trained Support Vector Machine classifier. A two-sided, two-sample Wilcoxon test was applied to test whether the difficulty of brochures of pair-wise topic groups was different from each other. Results In total, n=68 brochures were included for readability assessment, of which 71% (48/68) were published by pharmaceutical companies, 22% (15/68) by nonprofit organizations, and 7% (5/68) by public institutions. The collection was separated into four topic groups: basic information on Psoriasis/Psoriatic Arthritis (G1/G2), lifestyle, and behavior with Psoriasis/Psoriatic Arthritis (G3/G4), medication and therapy guidance (G5), and other topics (G6). On average, readability levels were comparatively low, with FRE=31.58 and WSTF=11.84. However, two-thirds of the educational materials (69%; 47/68) achieved a vocabulary score ≦4 (ie, easy, very easy) and were, therefore, suitable for a lay audience. Statistically significant differences between brochure groups G1 and G3 for FRE (P=.001), WSTF (P=.003), and vocabulary measure (L) (P=.01) exist, as do statistically significant differences for G2 and G4 in terms of FRE (P=.03), WSTF (P=.03) and L (P=.03). Conclusions Online Psoriasis/Psoriatic Arthritis patient education materials in German require, on average, a college or university education level. As a result, patients face barriers to understanding the available material, even though the vocabulary used seems appropriate. For this reason, publishers of Psoriasis/Psoriatic Arthritis brochures should carefully revise their educational materials to provide easier and more comprehensible information for patients with lower health literacy levels.



Your data is gold – Data donation for better healthcare?

November 2019

·

236 Reads

·

24 Citations

it - Information Technology

Today, medical data such as diagnoses, procedures, imaging reports and laboratory tests, are not only collected in context of primary research and clinical studies. In addition, citizens are tracking their daily steps, food intake, sport exercises, and disease symptoms via mobile phones and wearable devices. In this context, the topic of “data donation” is drawing increased attention in science, politics, ethics and practice. This paper provides insights into the status quo of personal data donation in Germany and from a global perspective. As this topic requires a consideration of several perspectives, potential benefits and related, multifaceted challenges for citizens, patients and researchers are discussed. This includes aspects such as data quality & accessibility, privacy and ethical considerations.


Barriers and Facilitators to the Implementation of eHealth Services: A Systematic Literature Analysis

November 2019

·

481 Reads

·

270 Citations

Journal of Medical Internet Research

Background: The field of eHealth has a history of more than 20 years. During that time, many different eHealth services were developed. However, factors influencing the adoption of such services were seldom the main focus of analyses. For this reason, organizations adopting and implementing eHealth services seem not to be fully aware of the barriers and facilitators influencing the integration of eHealth services into routine care. Objective: The objective of this work is to provide (1) a comprehensive list of relevant barriers to be considered and (2) a list of facilitators or success factors to help in planning and implementing successful eHealth services. Methods: For this study, a twofold approach was applied. First, we gathered experts' current opinions on facilitators and barriers in implementing eHealth services via expert discussions at two health informatics conferences held in Europe. Second, we conducted a systematic literature analysis concerning the barriers and facilitators for the implementation of eHealth services. Finally, we merged the results of the expert discussions with those of the systematic literature analysis. Results: Both expert discussions (23 and 10 experts, respectively) identified 15 barriers and 31 facilitators, whereas 76 barriers and 268 facilitators were found in 38 of the initial 56 articles published from 12 different countries. For the analyzed publications, the count of distinct barriers reported ranged from 0 to 40 (mean 10.24, SD 8.87, median 8). Likewise, between 0 and 48 facilitators were mentioned in the literature (mean 9.18, SD 9.33, median 6). The combination of both sources resulted in 77 barriers and 292 facilitators for the adoption and implementation of eHealth services. Conclusions: This work contributes a comprehensive list of barriers and facilitators for the implementation and adoption of eHealth services. Addressing barriers early, and leveraging facilitators during the implementation, can help create eHealth services that better meet the needs of users and provide higher benefits for patients and caregivers.


Barriers and Facilitators to the Implementation of eHealth Services: A Systematic Literature Analysis (Preprint)

March 2019

·

68 Reads

BACKGROUND The field of eHealth has a history of more than twenty years. During that time many different eHealth services were developed. Factors influencing the adoption of such services were, however, seldomly the main focus of analyses. For this reason, organizations adopting and implementing eHealth services seem not to be fully aware of barriers and facilitators influencing the integration of eHealth services into routine care. OBJECTIVE The objective of this work is twofold (a) to provide a comprehensive list of relevant barriers to be considered, and (b) a list of facilitators or success factors to help in planning and implementing successful eHealth services. METHODS For this study a twofold approach was applied. On the one hand, we gathered experts’ current opinions on facilitators and barriers in implementing eHealth services via expert discussions at two health informatics conferences held in Europe. On the other hand, we conducted a systematic literature analysis concerning the barriers and facilitators for the implementation of eHealth services. Finally, we merged the results of the expert discussions with the ones of the systematic literature analysis. RESULTS Both expert discussions identified 15 barriers and 31 facilitators, whereas 76 barriers and 268 facilitators were found in 38 articles published from twelve different countries. The combination of both sources resulted in 77 barriers and 292 facilitators for the adoption and implementation of eHealth services. CONCLUSIONS This work contributes a comprehensive list of barriers and facilitators for the implementation and adoption of eHealth services. Addressing barriers early and leveraging facilitators during the implementation can help creating eHealth services that better meet the needs of its users and provide higher benefits for patients and caregivers. CLINICALTRIAL No trial has been performed.


Citations (25)


... Wikipedia is a well-known source of health information compared to other online sources [18,30,48]. It is frequently used by both the general public and professionals to find medical information [41]. ...

Reference:

Readability of wikipedia pages on COVID-19
Readability of English, German, and Russian Disease-related Wikipedia pages: Automated Computational Analysis (Preprint)
  • Citing Article
  • January 2022

Journal of Medical Internet Research

... An analysis of tweets during the early stages of the pandemic indicated that the account of the WHO ranked fifth among mentions, indicating "the importance of the WHO as an information source for people concerned with coronavirus" (Park et al., 2022, p. 8). Another analysis of over 21 million global tweets in the early stages of the pandemic found the CDC ranked 25th and the WHO ranked 27th in the 50 most shared website domains (Pobiruchin et al., 2020). A survey in Spain, Italy and the UK, for example, found that information from public institutional web or blogs was not the most common source, but was nevertheless sought by 50.6%, 41.9%, and 45.7% of respondents, respectively (Moreno et al., 2023). ...

Temporal and Location Variations, and Link Categories for the Dissemination of COVID-19–Related Information on Twitter During the SARS-CoV-2 Outbreak in Europe: Infoveillance Study

Journal of Medical Internet Research

... They report, "that the majority of the 51 booklets (92.16%) is hard to read". In 2020, the study design was replicated by Wiesner et al. [25] for Psoriasis/Psoriatic Arthritis material written in German. They found, that "patient education materials in German require, on average, a college or university education level [..] even though the vocabulary used seems appropriate". ...

The Difficulty of German Information Booklets on Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis: Automated Readability and Vocabulary Analysis
  • Citing Article
  • February 2020

JMIR Dermatology

... Progress towards incorporating other data to benefit patients and health systems has been slower. Lack of attention to regulatory and privacy concerns in healthcare applications significantly affects digital trust (i.e., the confidence users have in the ability of people, technology, and processes to create a secure digital world) and consequently reduces patient adoption of tools and participation in research [22][23][24]. However, some approaches are emerging to enable progress. ...

Your data is gold – Data donation for better healthcare?
  • Citing Article
  • November 2019

it - Information Technology

... Cremers et al. 40 published a checklist based on a literature review and two Delphi panels with ehealth experts. Similarly, Schreiweiss et al. 41 produced a list of 77 barriers and 292 facilitators based on a literature review and workshops with medical and health informatics experts. Finally, a systematic review of systematic reviews by Ross et al. 20 presented important factors for the implementation of DHS, based on categories from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. ...

Barriers and Facilitators to the Implementation of eHealth Services: A Systematic Literature Analysis

Journal of Medical Internet Research

... One study also noted a low engagement rate with the intervention (Fokkema et al., 2019c). It has previously been noted that perceived usefulness and user satisfaction are under-researched in the field of wearable technologies (Wiesner et al., 2018). The main aim of this study was to map the use of RRT by recreational runners in Wales and their views on a proposed RRI prevention and self-management intervention. ...

Technology Adoption, Motivational Aspects, and Privacy Concerns of Wearables in the German Running Community: Field Study
  • Citing Article
  • December 2018

JMIR mhealth and uhealth

... La legibilidad es la que determina el nivel de comprensión lectora que una persona necesita para comprender un texto (Kružliaková et al, 2021;McInnes y Haglund, 2011). La Análisis de la legibilidad de la información sanitaria dirigida a la población vulnerable investigación muestra que la legibilidad de la información de salud en línea está por encima de la capacidad de lectura promedio de un adulto, siendo entre 10 y 13, que corresponde a un nivel de lectura de secundaria o bachillerato (Devea et al., 2022;Edmunds et al., 2014 ;Hansberry et al., 2013;Yaqub y Ghezzi, 2015;Lim y Johnston, 2021;Oliffe et al., 2019;Patel et al., 2015;Ostrovsky, 2022;Reynolds et al., 2022;Stefu et al., 2021;Storr et al., 2016;Worral et al ., 2020;Zowalla et al., 2018). En la literatura médica, el nivel de lectura recomendado oscila entre los 5 a los 9 grados de nivel (Hamnes et al., 2016); equivalente en España a un nivel de 5º de primaria a 2º de ESO. ...

Analyzing the Readability of Health Information Booklets on Cardiovascular Diseases
  • Citing Article
  • January 2018

Studies in Health Technology and Informatics

... In 2018, Zowalla and Wiesner [23] analyzed 2931 articles of the "Public Health Portal of Austria"(www.gesundheit.gov.at) using FRE, the 4 th Vienna formula (WSTF) and the measure L. Their analysis revealed low readability levels paired with a "moderate level of vocabulary difficulty." In 2018, L, WSTF and FRE were also applied by Keinki et al. [24] on 51 German cancer information booklets. They report, "that the majority of the 51 booklets (92.16%) is hard to read". ...

Computer-Based Readability Testing of Information Booklets for German Cancer Patients
  • Citing Article
  • April 2018

Journal of Cancer Education

... With the current boom in the use of advanced health monitoring technologies for both medical and personal use, wearables have become a large part of day-to-day lives [1]. The use of smartwatches and heart rate monitors for sports, and recreational activities, as well as monitoring of health conditions, is steadily on the rise to maintain optimal physical performance [2]. Biological markers such as cardiac rhythm, blood pressure, and respiratory variables have been investigated using smartphones and smartwatches [3,4], which could aid in the detection of, for instance, atrial fibrillation [5]. ...

Accuracy and Adoption of Wearable Technology Used by Active Citizens: A Marathon Event Field Study

JMIR mhealth and uhealth

... 12 In Sweden none of the 21 regions fully comply with the 2016 national regulatory framework, 13 and in Germany few patients can access their records online despite a legal right to full transparency. 14 Further incentives to implement these and other transparency regulations may be required, along with robust sanctions for non-compliance. ...

Report on the HEC 2016 Workshop: Opportunities and Challenges of Consumer-centric eHealth Services - An Interdisciplinary Workshop
  • Citing Technical Report
  • December 2016