Cited by 6Technology Use by Older AdultsGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesThoreau and American Literature

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Digital Health Privacy and Age: Quality and Safety Improvement in Long-Term-Care

Open access
Zuraw, Rachel, Sklar, Tara·2021·Indiana Health Law Review

Abstract

Delivering basic and fundamental community-based, long-term care in the private home and the local community is less costly than providing it in an institution; however, it still faces impediments such as workforce challenges, rising costs, and concerns with the increasing prevalence of elder abuse. As the population ages and the number of older Americans managing multiple chronic conditions grows, it is essential to develop additional resources to provide sustainable community-based, long-term care. Sensor monitoring technologies provide a promising avenue for improving access to such care, with developers making major breakthroughs in the provision of long-term care at both senior residential facilities and directly in the home. We are seeing a growth in the use of sensors to reduce staffing, enable older adults to have a greater degree of self-management, and manage overall costs. The advantages of sensor monitoring technology are not, however, without their risks: the necessary trade-offs between innovation and privacy are heightened when applied to an older population where decreased cognitive function plays a larger role. While there is emerging scholarship on sensor privacy concerns in health care and for patient data sharing, there is limited literature that explores sensor privacy and consent practices for these devices by seniors in long-term care settings. This Article is dedicated to the forward-looking insights generated by Professor Eleanor Kinney to improve quality and safety in community-based, long-term care and investigates how the use of sensor technology can be optimally integrated with privacy protections to support this goal.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.18060/25040

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. [1]1. See generally Nat'l Acad. of Sci., Eng'g, & Med, Artificial Intelligence Applications for Older Adults and People with Disabilities: Balancing Safety and Autonomy: Proceedings of a Workshop in Brief, NAT'L ACAD. PRESS., (May, 2019), http://nap.edu/25427 [https://perma.cc/YN8S-ETBA];
  2. [4]4. Bridget Haeg, The Future of Caring for Elders in Their Homes: An Alternative to Nursing Homes, 9 NAELA J. 237, 252 (2013) ("
  3. [26]26. See e.g., Sofia Siggelin, Seniors Privacy Concerns in Health Technology Wearables: Regulations vs. User Concerns, (2017) (unpublished B.A. thesis, Luleå University of Technology) http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1104482/FULLTEXT03 [https://perma.cc/XX4L- CSZK].
  4. [27]27. See generally, e.g. Chris Jay Hoofnagle, Assessing the Federal Trade Commission's Privacy Assessments, 14 IEEE SEC'Y & PRIVACY 58 (Mar. 2016) (for a small, though prominent sample); Paul Schwartz, Legal Access to Global Cloud Data, 118 COLUMBIA L. REV. 1681 (2018);
  5. [28]28. See, e.g., Caroline N. Harada, Marissa C. Natelson Love & Kristen Triebel, Normal Cognitive Aging, 29 CLIN. GERIATRIC MED. 737, 738 (2013). 58. Id. at 741.
  6. [30]30. Mary A. Majumder, et al., The Role of Participants in a Medical Information Commons, 47 J.L. Med. & Ethics 51, 53 (2019).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Zuraw, R., & Sklar, T.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
  • University of Arizona (US)
Venue
Indiana Health Law Review
Published
2021-02-22
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
85-98
ISSN
  • 1549-3199 (ISSN-L)
  • 2374-2593
OpenAlex
W3090598401
Cited by
6
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1
FWCI
0.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Indiana Health Law Review (publishedVersion)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Technology Use by Older Adults
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Geriatric Care and Nursing Homes
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Thoreau and American Literature
Keywords
long-term care, privacy, older adults, informed consent, community-based care, home care, elder abuse, cognitive decline, quality and safety, digital health, patient data sharing, workforce challenges

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review