Objective: The term consumer health technologies we use in this paper refers to fitness and health apps, wearables and other self-tracking devices that collect health-related data. Our paper aims to bridge the gap between the growing literature base of sociological research and ethical reflection on the (non-intended) effects of consumer health technology use on the psycho-social level, such as stress, responsibilization or a loss of intuitive sense for signs of health or illness. Special consideration should be given to vulnerable individuals, as the positive and negative effects of consumer health technology use may be unequally distributed. This perspective may help to guide policymaking and the responsible development of consumer health technologies. Methods: Using a narrative review approach, we refer to empirical and theoretical studies dealing with user types and effects related to the use of consumer health technologies. We provide an overview of consumer health technology user typologies and evidence of the unintended psycho-social effects of consumer health technology use. On this basis, we propose a user typology that may serve as a future tool for ethical reflection on negative side effects. Results: Evidence of the potential negative side effects of consumer health technology use, as presented in the literature, is inconclusive due to the high diversity of consumer health technology users and the way they use consumer health technologies. Our proposed user typology aims to more comprehensively document the diversity of users by incorporating the way in which users identify with and use their self-tracked data, attitudes towards the new technology and social interactions via consumer health technologies, and the purpose and self-determinedness of consumer health technology use. Conclusions: More systematic and quantitative empirical research on the effects of consumer health technology use in diverse settings and with diverse user types is necessary to inform public health policy. In addition to evidence-based certification of medical consumer health technologies, more practical and flexible ways to protect users from side effects may have to be developed and adopted, especially regarding the increasing number of non-medical consumer health technologies.

Prosthetic technology for people with missing limbs has made great progress in recent decades. However, acceptance rates and user satisfaction are not only dependent on technical aspects, but also to a great extent on social and psychological factors. We propose that these factors should receive greater attention in order to improve prosthetic care and give recommendations how to incorporate the findings from social science in research and development (R&D) and in care practice. Limited access due to high costs of new prosthetic technology combined with rising costs in health care systems in general is a further issue we address. Our legal and ethical analysis of the reimbursement process in Germany shows that this issue requires further empirical investigation, a stakeholder dialogue and maybe even policy changes. Social science knowledge and participatory methods are of high relevance to answer questions about the benefit of prosthetics for users, based on individual needs and preferences, which should be at the core of debates on ethical resource allocation.

In den Bürgerwissenschaften, auch bekannt unter dem englischen Begriff Citizen Science, existiert eine Vielzahl an Forschungsansätzen und Methoden. Während diese in vielen wissenschaftlichen Disziplinen gut etabliert sind, finden sich augenscheinlich relativ wenige davon in der medizinischen und Gesundheitsforschung. Allerdings zeigt ein Blick in die Praxis, dass bürgerwissenschaftliche Ansätze in der Medizin und Gesundheitsforschung durchaus praktiziert werden, jedoch häufig unter anderen Namen. Der Artikel bietet aus interdisziplinärer Perspektive einen (selektiven) Überblick über Begriffe, reflektiert diese und die dahinterstehenden Methoden und diskutiert sie vergleichend. Im Fokus steht dabei der Grad der Beteiligung der Bürger*innen bzw. Patient*innen an wissenschaftlicher Forschung.

The increasing availability of extensive and complex data has made human genomics and its applications in (bio)medicine an at­ tractive domain for artificial intelligence (AI) in the form of advanced machine learning (ML) methods. These methods are linked not only to the hope of improving diagnosis and drug development. Rather, they may also advance key issues in biomedicine, e. g. understanding how individual differences in the human genome may cause specific traits or diseases. We analyze the increasing convergence of AI and genom­ics, the emergence of a corresponding innovation system, and how these associative AI methods relate to the need for causal knowledge in biomedical research and development (R&D) and in medical prac­tice. Finally, we look at the opportunities and challenges for clinical practice and the implications for governance issues arising from this convergence.

A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-21369-z