The Use of Self-Quantification Systems for Personal Health Information: Big Data Management Activties and Prospects

by | Feb 24, 2015 | Research Publications

Author(s):

  • Manal Almalki,
  • Kathleen Gray
  • Fernando Martin Sanchez 

Abstract:

Background

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’.

Objectives

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.

Method

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.

Findings

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.

Conclusions

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).

Documentation:

https://doi.org/10.1186/2047-2501-3-S1-S1

References:
  1. Swan M: Emerging patient-driven health care models: an examination of health social networks, consumer personalized medicine and quantified self-tracking. International journal of environmental research and public health. 2009, 6: 492-525. 10.3390/ijerph6020492.PubMed Central Article PubMed  Google Scholar 
  2. Almalki M, Martin-Sanchez F, Gray K: The Use of Self-Quantification Systems: Big Data Prospects and Challenges. HISA BIG DATA 2013 conference; Australia, Melbourne. 2013 Google Scholar 
  3. Almalki M, Martin-Sanchez F, Gray K: Self-Quantification: The Informatics of Personal Data Management for Health and Fitness. 2013, University of Melbourne: Institute for a Broadband-Enabled Society (IBES), 9780734048318 Google Scholar 
  4. Lupton D: Understanding the Human Machine [Commentary]. Technology and Society Magazine, IEEE. 2013, 32: 25-30.Article  Google Scholar 
  5. Quantified Self. [http://quantified-self.meetup.com]
  6. Wikipedia. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantified_Self]
  7. Fox S, Duggan M: Tracking for Health. Pew Internet & American Life Project. 2013 Google Scholar 
  8. Swan M: The quantified self: Fundamental disruption in big data science and biological discovery. Big Data. 2013, 1: 85-99. 10.1089/big.2012.0002.Article  Google Scholar 
  9. Beyer MA, Laney D: The Importance of ‘Big Data’: A Definition. Stamford, CT: Gartner. 2012 Google Scholar 
  10. Hibbard JH, Stockard J, Mahoney ER, Tusler M: Development of the Patient Activation Measure (PAM): Conceptualizing and Measuring Activation in Patients and Consumers. Health Services Research. 2004, 39: 1005-1026. 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2004.00269.x.PubMed Central Article PubMed  Google Scholar 
  11. Zeo. [http://www.myzeo.com/sleep/shop/featured-products/zeo-sleep-manager-bedside.html]
  12. Fitbit. [http://www.Fitbit.com]
  13. Actipressure. [http://www.fitlinxx.net/fitlinxx-products.htm]
  14. MoodPanda. [http://moodpanda.com]
  15. iBGStar. [http://www.bgstar.com/web/ibgstar]
  16. Sensaris Senspod. [http://www.sensaris.com]
  17. 23andMe. [https://www.23andme.com]
  18. uBiome. [http://www.indiegogo.com/ubiome]
  19. Digifit. [http://new.digifit.com]
  20. BodyTrack. [http://www.bodytrack.org]
  21. Wikilife. [http://wikilife.org]
  22. Martin Sanchez F, Gray K, Bellazzi R, Lopez-Campos G: Exposome informatics: considerations for the design of future biomedical research information systems. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. 2014, 21: 386-390. 10.1136/amiajnl-2013-001772.PubMed Central Article PubMed  Google Scholar 
  23. Vashist SK: Non-invasive glucose monitoring technology in diabetes management: A review. Analytica Chimica Acta. 2012 Google Scholar 
  24. Gupta N, Jilla S: Digital Fitness Connector: Smart Wearable System. Informatics and Computational Intelligence (ICI), 2011 First International Conference. 2011, 118-121. 12-14 Dec 2011Chapter  Google Scholar 
  25. Garmin. [http://www.garmin.com/au/products/fitness-products]
  26. Suunto. [http://www.suunto.com/en-AU]
  27. Adidas MiCoach. [http://micoach.adidas.com]
  28. iTreadMill. [http://www.itreadmill.net/iTreadmill/index.html]
  29. RunKeeper. [http://itunes.apple.com/au/app/runkeeper-gps-running-walking/id300235330?mt=8]
  30. Endomondo. [http://www.endomondo.com]
  31. ChartmySelf. [https://www.chartmyself.com]
  32. TRAQS.me. [http://traqs.me]
  33. Statwing Intuitive Data Analysis. [https://www.statwing.com]
  34. Choi JM, Choi BH, Seo JW, Sohn RH, Ryu MS, Yi W, Park KS: A System for Ubiquitous Health Monitoring in the Bedroom via a Bluetooth Network and Wireless LAN. Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, 2004 IEMBS ’04 26th Annual International Conference of the IEEE. 2004, 3362-3365. 1-5 Sept 2004 Google Scholar 
  35. Wilson T: Information-Seeking Behavior: Designing Information Systems to Meet our Client’s Needs. ACURIL (Association of Caribbean University, Research and Institutional Libraries) XXV Conference, San Juan, Puerto Rico. 1995 Google Scholar 
  36. Kuutti K: Activity theory as a potential framework for human-computer interaction research. Context and consciousness. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 1995, 17-44. Google Scholar 
  37. Li I, Dey AK, Forlizzi J: Understanding my data, myself: supporting self-reflection with ubicomp technologies. Proceedings of the 13th international conference on Ubiquitous computing. 2011, 405-414. Google Scholar 
  38. Jones W: Personal Information Management. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology. 2007, 41: 453-504. 10.1002/aris.2007.1440410117.Article  Google Scholar 
  39. Li I, Dey A, Forlizzi J: A stage-based model of personal informatics systems. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems; Atlanta, Georgia, USA. 2010, ACM, 557-566. Google Scholar