Proposal on Wearable Technology in Healthcare

Background and Introduction:

Combining the strength of technology with the need for modern healthcare, wearable IT in healthcare has emerged as a quickly developing and consequential sector. This section defines key terms, summarizes the present knowledge on wearable healthcare technologies, and explains why this research was necessary.

Previous and current state of knowledge

Over the past decade, there has been a dramatic improvement in the use of wearable technology in medical treatment. The popularity of wearable electronics like smartwatches, fitness trackers, and health monitors has skyrocketed. Initially, these gadgets were designed to monitor cardiorespiratory performance (Wilson et al., 2017). However, they have progressed to the point where they can track various health indicators.

The potential usefulness of wearable technology in medical treatment has been shown in several studies. The usefulness of wearable devices for monitoring cardiovascular health by demonstrating their ability to precisely measure heart rate and physical activity (Talukdar et al., 2022). Now that technology has advanced, we have wearables that can track our heart rates our movements while we sleep, and even remind us to take our medications. Furthermore, the significance of wearable technology in healthcare was brought to light by the COVID-19 pandemic. Wearables were used to monitor people’s health remotely, which helped doctors catch problems sooner and relieve pressure on hospitals. These tools were vital in preventing harm to both medical professionals and people.

 Justification for study

• One of the most promising applications of wearable technology is in the field of early disease diagnosis, where it might lead to life-saving interventions.
• Continuous, real-time monitoring of patient health indicators is possible with these devices, allowing doctors to see fewer patients in the clinic.
• Improved patient engagement occurs when people are more actively involved in their own health care because of the access to relevant data and insights made possible by wearable technology.
• Health Care Based On Data(4) Wearables provide a mountain of data that may be used to improve healthcare delivery and study populations.
• Wearable technology can help save money in the healthcare system by decreasing the number of hospitalizations and pointless doctor’s visits.

This research intends to add to existing information by providing an in-depth examination of wearable technology’s current condition, uses, limits, and future potential in the healthcare industry. This research will provide light on how wearables may be used to enhance healthcare outcomes and solve critical difficulties in the healthcare industry by examining their public health and scientific significance.

Definitions of terminology:

Wearable technology is used to describe electronic gadgets that may be attached to a person in some way, whether it as an accessory or as an implant, and which are fitted with sensors and associated software to track and transmit information about the user’s health and physical activity (Fortin-Côté et al., 2019).

Healthcare refers to all the activities involved in keeping people healthy and helping those who are ill or injured to get better. Healthcare, as it relates to this research, is defined here as the strategic application of technology inside the healthcare system.

Research questions

1. What are the present capabilities and applications of wearable technology in healthcare, and how has it changed over the last ten years?
2. What are the main effects of wearable technology on science and public health in the healthcare industry, especially with regard to early disease identification and ongoing patient monitoring?

Objectives

The following are the study’s goals and objectives

• To look into the history, present condition, and potential uses of wearable technology in the medical field.
• To evaluate wearable technology’s scientific and public health value by looking at its potential for ongoing patient monitoring and early disease diagnosis.

Methodology

Paradigm

Using a mixed-methods approach, this study incorporates qualitative and quantitative research paradigms. The quantitative component is a thorough examination of pertinent literature to assess wearable technology’s development and present status in healthcare (Bryson, 2023). Through expert interviews and theme analysis, the qualitative component investigates the implications of wearable technology for science and public health.

Summary:

1. Systematic Review of Literature: This part entails a thorough analysis of the body of research on wearable technologies in healthcare. It seeks to present a thorough synopsis of the topic, evaluate technical developments, and lay the groundwork for future research.
2. Expert Consultations: Experts in data science, public health, and healthcare technology will be questioned in semi-structured interviews. These interviews will provide information about wearable technology’s promise, difficulties, and current and future uses in healthcare.

Sample/Population:

1. Systematic Review of Literature: Peer-reviewed articles, reports, and scholarly papers about wearable technology in healthcare make up the sample for the literature study. The research that meets the inclusion criteria has all been published in the past 10 years.
2. Expert Consultations: Purposively choosing the interview subjects will consider their knowledge of wearable technologies, public health, and healthcare. Professionals from academia, business, and healthcare facilities will make up the sample.

Size of Sample

A wide range of papers will be included in the literature review to provide a thorough overview. In order to attain data saturation—the point at which no new information is revealed through additional interviews—a sample size of about 10–15 experts will be used for the expert interviews.

Sampling Method and Recruiting Strategy

A methodical search and selection of peer-reviewed papers from databases like PubMed, IEEE Xplore, and Google Scholar is part of the recruiting process for the literature review (Krittanawong, 2017). On the other hand, a purposive sampling strategy will be utilized for the expert interviews in order to identify experts who meet the requirements with regard to expertise and experience regarding wearable technology in healthcare.

Number of Researchers involved

A group of three researchers with backgrounds in data analysis, public health, and healthcare technology will carry out this investigation.

Method of Data Collection

1. Systematic Review of Literature: Systematic searches, abstract screening, and full-text reviews of chosen papers will be used to gather data. The literature will be searched, analyzed, and summarised.
2. Expert Consultations: We will conduct semi-structured interviews in person or over video conference. We’ll utilize open-ended questions to learn more about the experts’ viewpoints on wearable technologies in healthcare.

Duration of Collecting Data

The literature review data gathering will take around two months. Over a three to four-month period, expert interviews will be performed.

Location

Most of the research activities will be carried out at our research facility and through online interviews with specialists from different regions.

Steps and Resources:

Data will be extracted using standardized forms, and known search techniques will be followed for the literature evaluation (Ruddle, 2023). The expert interviews will take place in a semi-structured format and run for about 45 minutes each. Interviews will be recorded and transcribed using software for audio recording and transcription.

Variables

Variables about scientific advances, public health consequences, and the history and present status of wearable technology in healthcare will all be examined in this study. Themes will cover applications in healthcare, emerging technologies, difficulties, and possibilities.

Validity and reliability:

To guarantee the accuracy of the data, the systematic literature review will adhere to strict inclusion and exclusion criteria (Opuda & Bauder, 2022). Validity for expert interviews will be guaranteed by carefully choosing the experts, and inter-coder reliability will be preserved by the study team members reaching a consensus.

Considerations for Ethics

Informed consent from interview subjects, maintaining their anonymity, and following data protection laws are all ethical issues. The study will adhere to our institution’s ethical policies and procedures.

Validation of results

Validation of results will involve cross-referencing information from the literature review with expert opinions, ensuring data consistency. In order to thoroughly address the study questions and objectives, this methodology combines the advantages of both quantitative and qualitative methodologies. It makes it possible to thoroughly examine wearable technology in healthcare from various angles.

Data analysis

The data analysis for this mixed-methods study encompasses two distinct methodologies. The objective of this systematic literature review is to compile pertinent data from a carefully chosen set of studies. The review will specifically examine technical trends, applications, problems, and achievements in the field of wearable technology as it pertains to healthcare. Thematic synthesis facilitates the identification of recurring themes and patterns, whilst data visualization serves to portray significant findings lucidly (Bista & Gaulee, 2017). A comparative analysis will reveal discrepancies and similarities throughout the literature, providing a range of perspectives.

In contrast, thematic analysis will be paramount in conducting expert interviews. This particular qualitative methodology involves the identification of patterns, themes, and pertinent statements within the dataset obtained from interviews. The interviews will be transcribed in a word-for-word manner to ensure the accuracy of the data, and the process of coding will be employed to uncover significant themes (Miyuki et al., 2017). The forthcoming discussion will expound upon, analyze, and amalgamate these overarching concepts in order to furnish a complete comprehension of scholarly viewpoints regarding the public health and scientific ramifications of wearable technology in the healthcare sector. This analysis combines the results of a systematic literature review with expert perspectives, enabling a comprehensive understanding of the research questions and objectives and providing extensive insights on the role of wearable technology in the healthcare sector.

Limitations

Limitations on Literature Review

1. Bias in Publications: Due to the higher likelihood of publishing studies with substantial or positive outcomes, the systematic literature review may be subject to publication bias. This can cause the review’s good results to be overrepresented (Duyx et al., 2019).
2. Source Quality: The reliability and generalizability of the findings may be impacted by variations in the quality of the evaluated sources.
3. Time Limitations: Studies released within the previous 10 years are the main focus of the review. This period permits an examination of current advancements, but it could omit earlier research that could offer insightful historical background.

Limitation on Interviews:

1. Preference for Some: The variety of viewpoints on the subject may be only partially represented by the sample of experts chosen for interviews. Purposive sampling, the foundation for expert inclusion, may bring selection bias.
2. Difference in Reaction: The subjective nature of expert replies can lead to variations in the depth and quality of interview data (Pan & Guo, 2019). The level of detail that specific experts supply may differ from that of others, which might affect how thorough the study is.

General Limitations

1. Explicitness: Only some situations may benefit equally from the conclusions drawn from a thorough assessment of the literature and expert interviews. The results may be less applicable to other healthcare contexts or technologies due to the narrow focus on wearable technology in healthcare.
2. Clockwise Motion: Because wearable technology is a quickly developing topic, study findings may reflect the field’s condition during the investigation. As a result, they can miss new advances.
3. Restrictions on Resources: The resources at hand, such as time and access to specialists and data sources, may limit the study’s breadth and depth. This can restrict how thorough the study is
4. Awareness of Biases: Although every attempt will be taken to reduce researcher bias, it is essential to recognize that individual viewpoints and opinions may affect how data is analyzed and interpreted.

Conclusion

This study conducted a comprehensive analysis of wearable technology in the healthcare sector, uncovering its swift development, present functionalities, and significant ramifications for public health and scientific progress. By conducting systematic literature reviews and expert interviews, our research sheds light on the increasing significance of wearable devices. These gadgets, initially designed to track simple data, have expanded their capabilities to provide complete health monitoring. The value of remote patient care was highlighted during the COVID-19 epidemic. Nevertheless, it is essential to acknowledge that additional concerns were raised, such as data security and ethical problems (DARGA, 2023). Although the study does have certain limitations, it serves to strengthen the potential of wearable technology in the healthcare field. This, in turn, opens up avenues for further research and innovation focused on improving patient care, empowering individuals in their management of health, and increasing public health.

References

Bista, K., & Gaulee, U. (2017). Recurring themes across fractal issues facing international students: A thematic analysis of 2016 DISSERTATIONS AND THESES. Journal of International Students, 7(4), 1135–1151. https://doi.org/10.32674/jis.v7i4.198

Bryson, D. (2023). Smart Clothing and wearable technology in medical and healthcare applications. Smart Clothes and Wearable Technology, 573–581. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-819526-0.00022-9

DARGA, H. (2023). Ethical problems and dilemmas experienced by preschool teachers during the covid-19 epidemic. International E-Journal of Educational Studies, 7(14), 324–342. https://doi.org/10.31458/iejes.1252513

Duyx, B., Swaen, G. M., Urlings, M. J., Bouter, L. M., & Zeegers, M. P. (2019). The strong focus on positive results in abstracts may cause bias in systematic reviews: A case study on abstract reporting bias. Systematic Reviews, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-019-1082-9

Fortin-Côté, A., Roy, J.-S., Bouyer, L., Jackson, P., & Campeau-Lecours, A. (2019). Allumo: Preprocessing and calibration software for wearable accelerometers used in posture tracking. Sensors, 20(1), 229. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20010229

Krittanawong, C. (2017). PubMed vs Google Scholar in Medicine: Future of Public Database. https://doi.org/10.2196/preprints.7595

Miyuki, Y., Hagiwara, Y., & Taniguchi, T. (2017). Unsupervised learning for spoken word production based on simultaneous word and phoneme discovery without transcribed data. 2017 Joint IEEE International Conference on Development and Learning and Epigenetic Robotics (ICDL-EpiRob). https://doi.org/10.1109/devlrn.2017.8329801

Opuda, E., & Bauder, J. (2022). Inclusion and exclusion criteria for sampling. Inclusion and Exclusion in Data. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071898505

Pan, H., & Guo, M. (2019). Can participatory water management improve residents’ subjective life quality? A case study from China. Water Supply, 19(5), 1547–1554. https://doi.org/10.2166/ws.2019.023

Ruddle, R. (2023). Using well-known techniques to visualize characteristics of data quality. Proceedings of the 18th International Joint Conference on Computer Vision, Imaging and Computer Graphics Theory and Applications. https://doi.org/10.5220/0011664300003417

Talukdar, D., de Deus, L. F., & Sehgal, N. (2022). Evaluation of a Camera-Based Monitoring Solution against Regulated Medical Devices to Measure: Heart Rate, Respiratory Rate, Oxygen Saturation, and Blood Pressure. https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.10.20.22281306

Wilson, M., Ramsay, S., & Young, K. J. (2017). Engaging overweight adolescents in a health and fitness program using wearable activity trackers. Journal of Pediatric Health Care, 31(4). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedhc.2017.03.001