Sarah Tabatabaei, Class of 2023
As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to unfold, the intersection between science and technology is increasingly apparent. The pandemic has necessitated innovative solutions to detect COVID-19 cases, trace contacts, and administer rapid screening of drugs. For most of the world, the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic will be remembered as the first to be addressed technologically (Rizzo 2020). The digitally social and interconnected nature of the modern world allows smartphones to become a large reservoir of useful information, one that global app-markets are maximizing.
In the last few months, numerous mobile-applications have launched for tracking and managing the pandemic by allowing distant connectivity in terms of both accessibility and function. Though new applications are continuing to appear as we near 2021, the “excitement about high-tech solutions to the pandemic was perhaps strongest when Google and Apple announced their initiative in April,” (Hendrix et al 2020). Since hearing of early initiatives to introduce mobile tracking, apps have been slow to “get off the ground,” and they have commonly been “hobbled by concerns around efficacy, privacy, and adoption,” (Wetsman 2020). Regardless, application user bases are continuing to increase and controversies persist.
The numerous mobile-applications for tracking and managing the pandemic are all built upon similar premises. In fact, the code created for tracing apps built in countries such as Ireland and Canada are available to other countries online. Subsequently, “instead of building the apps from scratch, they [other countries] merely have to customize an open-source app with specific local health information, graphics and languages, and don’t have to reinvent complicated code for measuring Bluetooth signals or write privacy policies and other legal notices from scratch,” (Leswing 2020). Apps work in a very standard manner globally:
1.Users must give short-range Bluetooth permission to the application.
2.The app detects when users have prolonged physical contact (5-15 minutes on average) with another user.
3.Users can upload potentially positive test results.
4.The app anonymously alerts others who have been in close proximity within the last 2 weeks.
5. Data is deleted after a certain number of days (Dean 2020).
Like all great ideas, limitations are inevitable. There is one very obvious limitation that seems to be at the surface of scientific and statistical discourse: applications must be downloaded by a large percentage of populations to be useful. This requires that the app is downloaded, Bluetooth is connected, and that the device is “connected to the internet at least once a day to transmit electronic keys to the central server,” (Rizzo 2020). Many researchers also claim that about two-thirds of a state or nation’s population must be active users (implying Bluetooth is on and devices are connected) of coronavirus smartphone apps for it to report “a useful number of contacts between infected and uninfected people” (Hendrix et al 2020). In addition to these limitations, there has been globally vocalized distrust in applications and concerns about privacy since the outset of mobile launches.
In more recent discussions of limitations, statistical investigations have uncovered an existing paradox between the intent and response of contact tracing applications. Researchers have coined the phrase “elderly paradox” revealing that although digital contact tracing would have greater epidemiologic importance to older subjects, they have poor access and understanding of mobile procedures due to less inclination to technology (Wetsman 2020). To combat this paradox, in many seniors living facilities, caregivers have introduced automated systems to guide contact tracing through real-time location tracking. Though mobile apps appear analogous to these automated systems, nursing facility systems employ real-time location tracking that ties that information to each resident’s name (Wetsman 2020). Nicole Westman, a health tech reporter at The Verge, details the concerns of seniors in facilities sharing that “they might balance out safety and privacy differently than other demographics... they don’t tend to have the same opportunity to make a choice based on their values” (Wetsman 2020). Recent discussions are being held to determine how to properly integrate technological improvements into the general public as well as senior living facilities and communities of primarily seniors. Accessibility, design, procedure, privacy, and autonomy all must continue to be considered as improvements are developed.
Though eight months have passed since the onset of digital contact tracing, in many countries, the need for containment and universal guidelines is more necessary than ever. In addition to creating guidelines, the current efforts to regulate and organize the app-market are vital to ensure quality of mobile applications to high standards.
References:
“Coronavirus Tracking Application.” Getty Images, Getty Images, 2020, www.gettyimages.com/photos/tracing?phrase=tracing&sort=mostpopular.
Dean, Sam. L.A. Has a New COVID-19 Contact Tracing App from a Controversial Source. Los Angeles Times , 2020, https://www.latimes.com/business/technology/story/2020-09-11/los-angeles-citizen-contact-tracing-safepass.
Hendrix, Steve, et al. “Cellphone Apps Designed to Track Covid-19 Spread Struggle Worldwide amid Privacy Concerns.” Washington Post- Technology , Washington Post, 18 Aug. 2020, https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/08/17/covid-tracking-apps-cellphones/.
Leswing, Kif. “States Are Finally Starting to Use the Covid-Tracking Tech Apple and Google Built — Here’s Why.” CNBS, 2020, https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/03/covid-app-exposure-notification-apple-google.html.
Rizzo, E. “COVID-19 Contact Tracing Apps: The ‘Elderly Paradox.’” PubMed Central (PMC), NCBI, 28 June 2020, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7321037/.
Wetsman, Nicole. “Senior Sensors: Digital Contact Tracing Wasn’t up for Debate in Senior Living Facilities.” The Verge, VoxMedia, 2020, https://www.theverge.com/21509117/contact-tracing-apps-digital-senior-nursing-homes.
Image: Getty Images
In the last few months, numerous mobile-applications have launched for tracking and managing the pandemic by allowing distant connectivity in terms of both accessibility and function. Though new applications are continuing to appear as we near 2021, the “excitement about high-tech solutions to the pandemic was perhaps strongest when Google and Apple announced their initiative in April,” (Hendrix et al 2020). Since hearing of early initiatives to introduce mobile tracking, apps have been slow to “get off the ground,” and they have commonly been “hobbled by concerns around efficacy, privacy, and adoption,” (Wetsman 2020). Regardless, application user bases are continuing to increase and controversies persist.
The numerous mobile-applications for tracking and managing the pandemic are all built upon similar premises. In fact, the code created for tracing apps built in countries such as Ireland and Canada are available to other countries online. Subsequently, “instead of building the apps from scratch, they [other countries] merely have to customize an open-source app with specific local health information, graphics and languages, and don’t have to reinvent complicated code for measuring Bluetooth signals or write privacy policies and other legal notices from scratch,” (Leswing 2020). Apps work in a very standard manner globally:
1.Users must give short-range Bluetooth permission to the application.
2.The app detects when users have prolonged physical contact (5-15 minutes on average) with another user.
3.Users can upload potentially positive test results.
4.The app anonymously alerts others who have been in close proximity within the last 2 weeks.
5. Data is deleted after a certain number of days (Dean 2020).
Like all great ideas, limitations are inevitable. There is one very obvious limitation that seems to be at the surface of scientific and statistical discourse: applications must be downloaded by a large percentage of populations to be useful. This requires that the app is downloaded, Bluetooth is connected, and that the device is “connected to the internet at least once a day to transmit electronic keys to the central server,” (Rizzo 2020). Many researchers also claim that about two-thirds of a state or nation’s population must be active users (implying Bluetooth is on and devices are connected) of coronavirus smartphone apps for it to report “a useful number of contacts between infected and uninfected people” (Hendrix et al 2020). In addition to these limitations, there has been globally vocalized distrust in applications and concerns about privacy since the outset of mobile launches.
In more recent discussions of limitations, statistical investigations have uncovered an existing paradox between the intent and response of contact tracing applications. Researchers have coined the phrase “elderly paradox” revealing that although digital contact tracing would have greater epidemiologic importance to older subjects, they have poor access and understanding of mobile procedures due to less inclination to technology (Wetsman 2020). To combat this paradox, in many seniors living facilities, caregivers have introduced automated systems to guide contact tracing through real-time location tracking. Though mobile apps appear analogous to these automated systems, nursing facility systems employ real-time location tracking that ties that information to each resident’s name (Wetsman 2020). Nicole Westman, a health tech reporter at The Verge, details the concerns of seniors in facilities sharing that “they might balance out safety and privacy differently than other demographics... they don’t tend to have the same opportunity to make a choice based on their values” (Wetsman 2020). Recent discussions are being held to determine how to properly integrate technological improvements into the general public as well as senior living facilities and communities of primarily seniors. Accessibility, design, procedure, privacy, and autonomy all must continue to be considered as improvements are developed.
Though eight months have passed since the onset of digital contact tracing, in many countries, the need for containment and universal guidelines is more necessary than ever. In addition to creating guidelines, the current efforts to regulate and organize the app-market are vital to ensure quality of mobile applications to high standards.
References:
“Coronavirus Tracking Application.” Getty Images, Getty Images, 2020, www.gettyimages.com/photos/tracing?phrase=tracing&sort=mostpopular.
Dean, Sam. L.A. Has a New COVID-19 Contact Tracing App from a Controversial Source. Los Angeles Times , 2020, https://www.latimes.com/business/technology/story/2020-09-11/los-angeles-citizen-contact-tracing-safepass.
Hendrix, Steve, et al. “Cellphone Apps Designed to Track Covid-19 Spread Struggle Worldwide amid Privacy Concerns.” Washington Post- Technology , Washington Post, 18 Aug. 2020, https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/08/17/covid-tracking-apps-cellphones/.
Leswing, Kif. “States Are Finally Starting to Use the Covid-Tracking Tech Apple and Google Built — Here’s Why.” CNBS, 2020, https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/03/covid-app-exposure-notification-apple-google.html.
Rizzo, E. “COVID-19 Contact Tracing Apps: The ‘Elderly Paradox.’” PubMed Central (PMC), NCBI, 28 June 2020, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7321037/.
Wetsman, Nicole. “Senior Sensors: Digital Contact Tracing Wasn’t up for Debate in Senior Living Facilities.” The Verge, VoxMedia, 2020, https://www.theverge.com/21509117/contact-tracing-apps-digital-senior-nursing-homes.
Image: Getty Images
Proudly powered by Weebly