The Role of Data Type and Recipient in Individuals’ Perspectives on Sharing Passively Collected Smartphone Data for Mental Health: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study

Background The growing field of personal sensing harnesses sensor data collected from individuals’ smartphones to understand their behaviors and experiences. Such data could be a powerful tool within mental health care. However, it is important to note that the nature of these data differs from the information usually available to, or discussed with, health care professionals. To design digital mental health tools that are acceptable to users, understanding how personal sensing data can be used and shared is critical. Objective This study aimed to investigate individuals’ perspectives about sharing different types of sensor data beyond the research context, specifically with doctors, electronic health record (EHR) systems, and family members. Methods A questionnaire assessed participants’ comfort with sharing six types of sensed data: physical activity, mood, sleep, communication logs, location, and social activity. Participants were asked about their comfort with sharing these data with three different recipients: doctors, EHR systems, and family members. A series of principal component analyses (one for each data recipient) was performed to identify clusters of sensor data types according to participants’ comfort with sharing them. Relationships between recipients and sensor clusters were then explored using generalized estimating equation logistic regression models. Results A total of 211 participants completed the questionnaire. The majority were female (171/211, 81.0%), and the mean age was 38 years (SD 10.32). Principal component analyses consistently identified two clusters of sensed data across the three data recipients: “health information,” including sleep, mood, and physical activity, and “personal data,” including communication logs, location, and social activity. Overall, participants were significantly more comfortable sharing any type of sensed data with their doctor than with the EHR system or family members (P<.001) and more comfortable sharing “health information” than “personal data” (P<.001). Participant characteristics such as age or presence of depression or anxiety did not influence participants’ comfort with sharing sensed data. Conclusions The comfort level in sharing sensed data was dependent on both data type and recipient, but not individual characteristics. Given the identified differences in comfort with sensed data sharing, contextual factors of data type and recipient appear to be critically important as we design systems that harness sensor data for mental health treatment and support.

[1]  Alyson K. Zalta,et al.  Veterans’ Perspectives on Fitbit Use in Treatment for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder: An Interview Study , 2018, JMIR mental health.

[2]  Tjeerd W. Boonstra,et al.  Using smartphone sensor technology for mental health research: Clear obstacles and hidden challenges , 2018, ArXiv.

[3]  Michael Zimmer,et al.  Addressing Conceptual Gaps in Big Data Research Ethics: An Application of Contextual Integrity , 2018 .

[4]  Patrick C. Staples,et al.  Relapse prediction in schizophrenia through digital phenotyping: a pilot study , 2018, Neuropsychopharmacology.

[5]  T. Insel Digital Phenotyping: Technology for a New Science of Behavior. , 2017, JAMA.

[6]  H. Christensen,et al.  Beyond symptom monitoring: Consumer needs for bipolar disorder self-management using smartphones , 2017, European Psychiatry.

[7]  D. Mohr,et al.  Personal Sensing: Understanding Mental Health Using Ubiquitous Sensors and Machine Learning. , 2017, Annual review of clinical psychology.

[8]  Konrad P Kording,et al.  Scalable Passive Sleep Monitoring Using Mobile Phones: Opportunities and Obstacles , 2017, Journal of medical Internet research.

[9]  Laura E. Barnes,et al.  Using Mobile Sensing to Test Clinical Models of Depression, Social Anxiety, State Affect, and Social Isolation Among College Students , 2017, Journal of medical Internet research.

[10]  Konrad Paul Kording,et al.  Distributed under Creative Commons Cc-by 4.0 the Relationship between Mobile Phone Location Sensor Data and Depressive Symptom Severity , 2022 .

[11]  Katie Shilton,et al.  Beyond the Belmont Principles: Ethical Challenges, Practices, and Beliefs in the Online Data Research Community , 2016, CSCW.

[12]  Katie Shilton,et al.  Why experience matters to privacy: How context‐based experience moderates consumer privacy expectations for mobile applications , 2015, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[13]  Bruce R. Schatz,et al.  National Surveys of Population Health: Big Data Analytics for Mobile Health Monitors , 2015, Big Data.

[14]  Mirco Musolesi,et al.  Trajectories of depression: unobtrusive monitoring of depressive states by means of smartphone mobility traces analysis , 2015, UbiComp.

[15]  Konrad Paul Kording,et al.  Mobile Phone Sensor Correlates of Depressive Symptom Severity in Daily-Life Behavior: An Exploratory Study , 2015, Journal of medical Internet research.

[16]  Venet Osmani,et al.  Smartphones in Mental Health: Detecting Depressive and Manic Episodes , 2015, IEEE Pervasive Computing.

[17]  Brian W. Powers,et al.  The digital phenotype , 2015, Nature Biotechnology.

[18]  Tobias Dehling,et al.  Exploring the Far Side of Mobile Health: Information Security and Privacy of Mobile Health Apps on iOS and Android , 2015, JMIR mHealth and uHealth.

[19]  Fanglin Chen,et al.  StudentLife: assessing mental health, academic performance and behavioral trends of college students using smartphones , 2014, UbiComp.

[20]  J. Bardram,et al.  Smartphone data as objective measures of bipolar disorder symptoms , 2014, Psychiatry Research.

[21]  John Zimmerman,et al.  Detection of Behavior Change in People with Depression , 2014, AAAI Workshop: Modern Artificial Intelligence for Health Analytics.

[22]  Norman M. Sadeh,et al.  Modeling Users' Mobile App Privacy Preferences: Restoring Usability in a Sea of Permission Settings , 2014, SOUPS.

[23]  César A. Hidalgo,et al.  Unique in the Crowd: The privacy bounds of human mobility , 2013, Scientific Reports.

[24]  Tanzeem Choudhury,et al.  Passive and In-Situ assessment of mental and physical well-being using mobile sensors , 2011, UbiComp '11.

[25]  G. Parker,et al.  Community Attitudes to the Appropriation of Mobile Phones for Monitoring and Managing Depression, Anxiety, and Stress , 2010, Journal of medical Internet research.

[26]  Helen Nissenbaum,et al.  Privacy in Context , 2009 .

[27]  Helen Nissenbaum,et al.  Privacy in Context - Technology, Policy, and the Integrity of Social Life , 2009 .

[28]  Katie Shilton,et al.  Four billion little brothers? , 2009, Commun. ACM.

[29]  D. Lazer,et al.  Using reality mining to improve public health and medicine. , 2009, Studies in health technology and informatics.

[30]  R. Spitzer,et al.  The PHQ-9 , 2001, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[31]  B. Löwe,et al.  A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7. , 2006, Archives of internal medicine.

[32]  Helen Nissenbaum,et al.  Privacy and contextual integrity: framework and applications , 2006, 2006 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (S&P'06).

[33]  P. Corrigan,et al.  The Paradox of Self-Stigma and Mental Illness , 2006 .

[34]  Scott D. Mainwaring,et al.  Privacy: personal information, threats, and technologies , 2005, Proceedings. 2005 International Symposium on Technology and Society, 2005. Weapons and Wires: Prevention and Safety in a Time of Fear. ISTAS 2005..

[35]  H. Nissenbaum Privacy as contextual integrity , 2004 .

[36]  J. Calabrese,et al.  Development and validation of a screening instrument for bipolar spectrum disorder: the Mood Disorder Questionnaire. , 2000, The American journal of psychiatry.

[37]  Anne Adams,et al.  Users' perception of privacy in multimedia communication , 1999, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[38]  H. Kranzler,et al.  The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT): validation of a screening instrument for use in medical settings. , 1995, Journal of studies on alcohol.

[39]  H. Skinner,et al.  The drug abuse screening test. , 2013, Addictive behaviors.