Abstract
The transformation of future healthcare capacity through the digitisation of healthcare systems will enable these systems to respond to future emergencies, as well as increased population pressures. The realisation over the last few decades that technologically empowered solutions can be implemented and work well, including within LMICs, was further expanded through the recent pandemic. Current challenges pertain to the scaling up of digital healthcare technologies, and their sustainability post-introduction in the field. Solutions to these challenges have already emerged, such as synthetic data, which allows the use of high-quality datasets without compromising the security of the original datasets. Ultimately, health outcomes can potentially be improved within an active health-data ecosystem, where both patients and healthcare providers are active participants, i.e. both generating and ingesting healthcare data. However, for that to be achieved, the sustainability of digitalization of healthcare in LMICs needs to be considered through the lens of infrastructural, financial, ethical and regulatory concerns.
You have full access to this open access chapter, Download chapter PDF
Keywords
1 Introduction
The transformation of healthcare is both a necessity and inevitability. A necessity due to the increasing rates of global disease burden and limitations in terms of availability of affordable and trained staff, especially so in Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs) (Ngwa et al. 2022; Kozlakidis et al. 2020); an inevitability because of the rapid technological developments which eventually integrate with and influence all aspects of healthcare (Nadhamuni et al. 2021; Peiris et al. 2014; Ospina-Pinillos et al. 2021; Gurung et al. 2019). For example, the expansion of remote healthcare coverage, already existing before the COVID-19 pandemic (Greenwood et al. 2014; Aisyah et al. 2020; De San et al. 2013) and multiplied during its duration (Caetano et al. 2020; Liu et al. 2020; Aisyah et al. 2023), has been a major step in this direction. It is anticipated that many of these remote healthcare coverage services will continue post-pandemic (Jazieh and Kozlakidis 2020), albeit with further context-driven customizations, adapted to the local milieu of patients and professionals (Abusanad 2021).
However, for the sustainability of such transformation in the long-term, a number of parameters would need to be considered, such as the scale-up of existing technologies; the security aspects of big and integrated data; and the personal, social and market acceptability. The transformation is most likely to occur upon the confluence of those factors rather than each one acting separately. This chapter, in the form of a perspective article, presents an overview of current advancements and their likely future impact on the transformation of digital healthcare services, with particular focus on LMIC settings.
2 Scaling Up Digital Health
The speed by which avian influenza (Uyeki 2008), zika virus (Garcia et al. 2016) and SARS-CoV-2 (Koelle et al. 2022) spread -and the potential of other infectious diseases exhibiting a similar, rapid global impact in the future- highlights the need for reliable and agile surveillance systems. Such systems, vertical by necessity as they are initially of a single-disease focus, can be established for surveillance of one disease and then be expanded to incorporate others (Zinsstag et al. 2020; Njuguna et al. 2019). The surveillance of infectious diseases is defined as the aggregate of reported positive results from designated clinical laboratories or laboratory networks for specific microorganisms that constitute a public health threat (Zeng et al. 2011). Thus, the routine use of surveillance data would need to be coupled with the ability to scale up the generation, ingestion and interpretation of such data during times of need (presented in detail in a different Chapter of this book). Moreover, as a preamble to such a scale up during times of emergency, this capacity would need to be tested through the ‘exercise’ of model crises, i.e., iterated emergency simulations with the aim of identifying and understanding the critical bottlenecks of existing systems. Identifying any such weak points would likely aid their addressing, thus strengthening existing structures over time. Therefore, there is a need for transparent, standards-based assessment of digital health systems that (as a possible solution) will be guided by a formal assessment across the main activity domains in the field, encompassing technical, clinical/operational and financial aspects (Mathews et al. 2019).
As surveillance technologies can now be mobile-enabled, and deployed at scale to monitor and to flag potential healthcare needs as they emerge in individuals and/or populations, one needs to consider that the generation and ingestion of data will be bi-directional. Specifically, the scaling up of digital health will not only be based on healthcare facilities outputting greater volumes of data through high-throughput analytical platforms (e.g., genomics, metabolomics). It would also involve the patients themselves, generating data (e.g., input for remote monitoring applications) and utilising this data (e.g., using clinical details to input into wellness and lifestyle guidance applications) (Moore 2020). Thus, new digital tools are likely to continue being introduced and integrated within public healthcare, supporting our understanding in an increasingly connected and challenging global environment. The ways in which such tools can be adapted and customised to LMIC settings at a population level, and beyond individual cases, is only now starting to emerge (Labrique et al. 2018).
3 Predictive Algorithms and Synthetic Data
The increasing volume of healthcare data underlies an ever-growing need to develop predictive algorithms that can ingest and translate that data. This will help clinicians treat patients based on their individualised response(s) to care rather than on generalised risk scores. Thus, in order to improve performance of existing algorithms and support the creation of new ones, access to large amounts of diverse and high-quality clinical data is needed. This is especially true for LMIC populations, which are under-represented in existing healthcare data sets, or where collected data can often be of low quality (Curado et al. 2009). Unfortunately, in most settings clinical data is also siloed due to privacy restrictions, and access to them is often limited only to the treating clinician or to clinicians within the same department/institution.
The reasoning behind such stringent data accessibility regulations is based on the premise that algorithms that consume and learn from large amounts of personal data can leak private details pertaining to individuals, which can then be used to discriminate against them specifically. Potential data breaches cannot be entirely prevented with current systems, because of the constant need to access, distribute and utilize information, that provides the opportunity for a deliberate data breach or a spontaneous mistake. According to datalossdb (2015), a platform from the Open Security Foundation (2005–2016), in 2014, approximately 50% of recorded data leakages were in private businesses, ca. 20% in government functions and about 30% in the education and health sectors (Alneyadi et al. 2016). There is the possibility of linking healthcare data to blockchain technology, so as when data actually leaks, it should be fairly straightforward to identify the source of the leak and address it appropriately. However, this technology has not been tested widely (Jayabalan and Jeyanthi 2022). In healthcare this is particularly dangerous, as this data can have irreversible consequences for an individual, or if the data is damaged/deleted, can never be replaced. Thus, a methodology is needed to mitigate the aim to harness data on the one hand, with the requirement to protect patient privacy on the other hand. Possibly, one of the most promising solutions to this need lies in synthetic data.
Synthetic data allows researchers to explore data independently of data protection constraints while maintaining patient privacy, enabling them to potentially share data worldwide. Synthetic data do not contain any of the original data sets (Chen et al. 2021). They have the same format as the original data, and they have identical statistical characteristics as the original individuals/population, across parameters and within subgroups in the population. All of this makes synthetic data similarly suitable for analysis, while at the same time overcoming privacy concerns.
Some of the uses of synthetic data in healthcare are:
-
They can simplify the collaborative and regulatory efforts when trying to share raw data.
-
Synthetic data platforms can facilitate hypothesis testing and model validation without intermediaries (Foraker et al. 2020)
-
Synthetic data can be used to train students and staff on new platforms (prior to using such platforms on real data) and be used to host hackathons and competitions improving existing platforms (Gonzales et al. 2023)
-
And finally, synthetic data can liberate data publicly, allowing access for scientists, citizen scientists and clinicians (even from different locations globally) to use those data freely in order to develop better care pathways (Benaim et al. 2020; Foraker et al. 2021)
For example, MDClone, a self-service data analytics environment, has developed a platform for querying and synthesising patient cohorts in a self-service manner. Specifically, a user can query an organisation’s data lake while being sequestered from it at all times, and subsequently create synthetic derivatives of the cohort and its corresponding characteristics. This new technology has been used on a great number of recent clinical studies (Masarweh 2019; Inbar and Dann 2019; Hochberg 2018; Meilik et al. 2022; Hod et al. 2023; Masarweh et al. 2021; Isenberg et al. 2022) and has the potential to model/‘re-create’ LMIC-specific data sets, while maintaining the data security requirements for the real data.
4 A Sustainable Path Forward
As with many other technologies introduced to the healthcare field, the operational advantages for any technology by themselves are unable to guarantee a long-term adoption. Instead, the operational aspects need to be complemented by the social and market acceptability of any new technologies. This definition of sustainability along three axes, the operational, financial, and social, has been successfully applied previously on other large, data-heavy infrastructures, such as biobanking, and can be extrapolated for the digital healthcare data needs, as a useful planning model (Table 1) (Watson et al. 2014; Henderson et al. 2015). For example, in terms of operational sustainability, the ever-growing need to produce and consume data, will introduce additional infrastructure requirements in LMICs in terms of data storage and security, staff training and integrations of systems (Kumar and Mostafa 2019; Labrique et al. 2018). Thus, future data infrastructure approaches in healthcare would need to be evaluated so that they align with global healthcare data requirements (to maintain a global connectivity and interaction) (Al Knawy et al. 2020), but also to design new approaches/data architectures that would be more appropriate for local needs/capacities.
An example for the successful re-design of data architecture, customised for LMICs, comes from the field of construction (which is also ‘data heavy’). In those examples, data flows were adapted to local needs with the aim of reducing costs and infrastructure pressures, while maintaining data output (Raes et al. 2021; Liu et al. 2021). This approach for transforming infrastructure costs was based on the concept of digital twins, i.e., a digital model of a physical entity that results in measurable outputs. The digital twins of existing models were used for example in the re-design of modular construction systems, allowing for a more context-adaptable output, in this particular case a quicker on-site assembly of the construction (Jiang et al. 2022). In terms of healthcare, digital twins can relate both to the physical infrastructure (i.e., a new methodology to enhance the infrastructure creation in LMICs), as well as the digital infrastructure (i.e., allow for the creation of alternative data pathways to identify the optimal one for a particular context).
The financial sustainability aspect, inevitably would align to and reflect market-driven needs. The potential structures and needs of financial incentives were presented in detail in chapter “Universal Internet Access Supporting Healthcare Provision: The Example of Indonesia” of this book. While the hard digital infrastructure (i.e., hardware) has reduced in costs considerably over the last two decades, the soft digital infrastructure (i.e., software) follows a different pricing structure, often developed as a Software as a Service (SaaS) model (Berndt et al. 2012; Oh et al. 2015). There have been a few individual SaaS implementations within LMICs (Ogwel et al. 2022; Karthikeyan and Sukanesh 2012), however, a more universal understanding or model has not emerged as yet. As the investment incentives have been discussed in chapter “Universal Internet Access Supporting Healthcare Provision: The Example of Indonesia”, a repetition of the information would be avoided here. The only additional aspect that would come into consideration however, in terms of investment, is the necessary investment in trained staff, that is necessary for all of the described infrastructure to be maintained as operational and impactful (Curioso 2019; Long et al. 2018).
Finally, in terms of social and market sustainability, the collection and potential distribution of immense amounts of information regarding individuals (e.g., even if self-reported via social networks) raises ethical concerns, as complete data anonymization is rendered ineffective in concealing the original data source, becoming harded, yet still feasible, to (re)identify individuals via the use of advanced systems and triangulation (Cecaj et al. 2016). However, if systems are entirely designed to use anonymized data, as an effort to protect individuals or population groups, this approach might not work optimally either, as the elements of information accountability and, hence, transparency may be affected. Regarding infectious disease outbreaks the use of anonymous data at source, is considered as current best practice, however, it is not a definitive solution for all situations that might arise within a healthcare ecosystem (Coltart et al. 2018). Therefore, challenges still remain in terms of ethics, as well as in terms of the legal framework for handling large healthcare datasets, including for example “credentialing, licensing, reimbursement, and issues related to technology, security, privacy, safety, and litigations” (Jazieh and Kozlakidis 2020). At this point a distinction would need to be made between public health ethics and clinical ethics: the former prioritizes common good; the latter prioritizes individual autonomy and ways to safeguard it (Chia and Oyeniran 2020). These nuances in ethical views/priorities may come into sharp focus within LMICs, during the implementation of digital healthcare technologies, where the pressures on availability of staff and funding are consistently acute.
Finally, data protection regulations are emerging within LMICs, albeit at a slow pace (Vodosin et al. 2021). The emergence of such frameworks is desirable from a market perspective, as they delineate the extent to which digital health can be implemented, systems integrated and reports provided to competent authorities. A question that is currently often discussed revolves around the regulation of algorithms that evolve (e.g., artificial intelligence (AI)-based applications) (Reddy et al. 2020; Amann et al. 2020). The approach currently proposed, including for LMICs, is that of a ‘reasonable explainability’ for regulating AI in healthcare, i.e. addressing explainability requirements based on the risks involved and providing explanations based on input, process and output norms (Sharma et al. 2020). Even at this level, the training of experts would be a necessity, in particular of regulatory authorities, as well as users of the AI-based solution (i.e., medical practitioners, nurses) on the limitations of explainability, and the risks that may not be explainable, which need to be communicated with patients. Thus, future developments within LMICs are anticipated to incorporate the development and implementation of healthcare digitization applications.
5 Conclusion
The current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic highlighted limitations and vulnerabilities of health systems and has driven a review of many healthcare systems, so that lessons are learned. The need for an increased capacity of healthcare systems to respond to iterative infectious disease emergencies, as well as systemic pressures, creates a driving force for the transformation of healthcare systems, based on new digital technologies. The examples over the last few decades of new technologies that were introduced, integrated and worked well within healthcare, including within LMICs, constitute the benchmark for an even greater integration of digital technologies. Hopefully this can be achieved as part of routine healthcare services design and procurement.
However, current challenges pertain to the scaling up of digital healthcare technologies, post-introduction in the field, and the use of predictive algorithms. Solutions to these challenges have already emerged, such as synthetic data, which allows the use of high-quality datasets without compromising the security of the original datasets. However, for that to be achieved, the sustainability of digitalization of healthcare in LMICs needs to be considered through the lens of infrastructural, financial, ethical and regulatory concerns.
References
Abusanad A (2021) “Najia” story: a WhatsApp support group for patients with breast cancer. Innov Dig Health Diagn Biomark 1(1):16–18
Aisyah DN, Ahmad RA, Artama WT, Adisasmito W, Diva H, Hayward AC, Kozlakidis Z (2020) Knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors on utilizing mobile health technology for TB in Indonesia: a qualitative pilot study. Front Public Health 6(8):531514
Aisyah DN, Lokopessy AF, Naman M, Diva H, Manikam L, Adisasmito W, Kozlakidis Z (2023) The use of digital technology for COVID-19 detection and response management in Indonesia: mixed methods study. Interact J Med Res 12(1):e41308
Al Knawy B, Adil M, Crooks G, Rhee K, Bates D, Jokhdar H, Klag M, Lee U, Mokdad AH, Schaper L, Al HR (2020) The Riyadh declaration: the role of digital health in fighting pandemics. Lancet 396(10262):1537–1539
Alneyadi S, Sithirasenan E, Muthukkumarasamy V (2016) A survey on data leakage prevention systems. J Netw Comput Appl 62:137–152
Amann J, Blasimme A, Vayena E, Frey D, Madai VI (2020) Explainability for artificial intelligence in healthcare: a multidisciplinary perspective. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 20(1):1–9
Benaim AR, Almog R, Gorelik Y, Hochberg I, Nassar L, Mashiach T, Khamaisi M, Lurie Y, Azzam ZS, Khoury J, Kurnik D (2020) Analyzing medical research results based on synthetic data and their relation to real data results: systematic comparison from five observational studies. JMIR Med Inform 8(2):e16492
Berndt RD, Takenga MC, Kuehn S, Preik P, Sommer G, Berndt S (2012) SaaS-platform for mobile health applications. In: International multi-conference on systems, signals & devices. IEEE, pp 1–4
Caetano R, Silva AB, Guedes AC, Paiva CC, Ribeiro GD, Santos DL, Silva RM (2020) Challenges and opportunities for telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic: ideas on spaces and initiatives in the Brazilian context. Cad Saude Publica 36:e00088920
Cecaj A, Mamei M, Zambonelli F (2016) Re-identification and information fusion between anonymized CDR and social network data. J Ambient Intell Humaniz Comput 7:83–96
Chen RJ, Lu MY, Chen TY, Williamson DF, Mahmood F (2021) Synthetic data in machine learning for medicine and healthcare. Nat Biomed Eng 5(6):493–497
Chia T, Oyeniran OI (2020) Human health versus human rights: an emerging ethical dilemma arising from coronavirus disease pandemic. Ethics Med Public Health 14:100511
Coltart CE, Hoppe A, Parker M, Dawson L, Amon JJ, Simwinga M, Geller G, Henderson G, Laeyendecker O, Tucker JD, Eba P (2018) Ethical considerations in global HIV phylogenetic research. Lancet HIV 5(11):e656–e666
Curado MP, Voti L, Sortino-Rachou AM (2009) Cancer registration data and quality indicators in low and middle income countries: their interpretation and potential use for the improvement of cancer care. Cancer Causes Control 20:751–756
Curioso WH (2019) Building capacity and training for digital health: challenges and opportunities in Latin America. J Med Internet Res 21(12):e16513
De San MK, Smith J, Lewin G (2013) Telehealth remote monitoring for community-dwelling older adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Telemed e-Health 19(9):652–657
Foraker RE, Yu SC, Gupta A, Michelson AP, Pineda Soto JA, Colvin R, Loh F, Kollef MH, Maddox T, Evanoff B, Dror H (2020) Spot the difference: comparing results of analyses from real patient data and synthetic derivatives. JAMIA Open 3(4):557–566
Foraker R, Guo A, Thomas J, Zamstein N, Payne PR, Wilcox A, N3C Collaborative (2021) The national COVID cohort collaborative: analyses of original and computationally derived electronic health record data. J Med Internet Res 23(10):e30697
Garcia E, Yactayo S, Nishino K, Millot V, Perea W, Briand S (2016) Zika virus infection: global update on epidemiology and potentially associated clinical manifestations/Epidemiologie et manifestations cliniques potentiellement associees a l’infection a virus Zika: mise a jour mondiale. Wkly Epidemiol Rec 91(7):73–82
Gonzales A, Guruswamy G, Smith SR (2023) Synthetic data in health care: a narrative review. PLOS Digital Health 2(1):e0000082
Greenwood DA, Young HM, Quinn CC (2014) Telehealth remote monitoring systematic review: structured self-monitoring of blood glucose and impact on A1C. J Diabetes Sci Technol 8(2):378–389
Gurung MS, Dorji G, Khetrapal S, Ra S, Babu GR, Krishnamurthy RS (2019) Transforming health care through Bhutan’s digital health strategy: progress to date. WHO South-East Asia J Public Health 8(2):77–82
Henderson M, Simeon-Dubach D, Albert M (2015) Finding the path to biobank sustainability through sound business planning. Biopreserv Biobank 13(6):385
Hochberg I (2018) Insulin detemir use is associated with higher occurrence of hypoglycemia in hospitalized patients with hypoalbuminemia. Diabetes Care 41(4):e44–e46
Hod T, Oberman B, Scott N, Levy L, Shlomai G, Beckerman P, Cohen-Hagai K, Mor E, Grossman E, Zimlichman E, Shashar M (2023) Predictors and adverse outcomes of acute kidney injury in hospitalized renal transplant recipients. Transpl Int 36:11141
Inbar T, Dann EJ (2019) Preoperative anemia and blood transfusion requirement during hip surgery: synthetic and real patient cohort data. Blood 134:3693
Isenberg Y, Zamstein N, Horesh N, Chowers Y, Bar-Yoseph H (2022) Risk factors for bacteremia after endoscopic procedures in hospitalized patients with a focus on neutropenia. J Clin Gastroenterol 56(1):e58–e63
Jayabalan J, Jeyanthi N (2022) Scalable blockchain model using off-chain IPFS storage for healthcare data security and privacy. J Parallel Distrib Comput 164:152–167
Jazieh AR, Kozlakidis Z (2020) Healthcare transformation in the post-coronavirus pandemic era. Front Med 7:429
Jiang Y, Li M, Guo D, Wu W, Zhong RY, Huang GQ (2022) Digital twin-enabled smart modular integrated construction system for on-site assembly. Comput Ind 136:103594
Karthikeyan N, Sukanesh R (2012) Case study on software as a service (SaaS) based emergency healthcare in India. Eur J Sci Res 69(3):461–472
Koelle K, Martin MA, Antia R, Lopman B, Dean NE (2022) The changing epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2. Science 375(6585):1116–1121
Kozlakidis Z, Abduljawad J, Al Khathaami AM, Schaper L, Stelling J (2020) Global health and data-driven policies for emergency responses to infectious disease outbreaks. Lancet Glob Health 8(11):e1361–e1363
Kumar M, Mostafa J (2019) Research evidence on strategies enabling integration of electronic health records in the health care systems of low-and middle-income countries: a literature review. Int J Health Plann Manag 34(2):e1016–e1025
Labrique AB, Wadhwani C, Williams KA, Lamptey P, Hesp C, Luk R, Aerts A (2018) Best practices in scaling digital health in low and middle income countries. Glob Health 14:1–8
Liu N, Huang R, Baldacchino T, Sud A, Sud K, Khadra M, Kim J (2020) Telehealth for noncritical patients with chronic diseases during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Med Internet Res 22(8):e19493
Liu M, Fang S, Dong H, Xu C (2021) Review of digital twin about concepts, technologies, and industrial applications. J Manuf Syst 58:346–361
Long LA, Pariyo G, Kallander K (2018) Digital technologies for health workforce development in low-and middle-income countries: a scoping review. Glob Health Sci Pract 6(Supplement 1):S41–S48
Masarweh K (2019) Big data, small kids… using MDclone to predict length of stay in bronchiolitis. The Ruth Rappaport Children’s Hospital
Masarweh K, Gur M, Toukan Y, Bar-Yoseph R, Kassis I, Gut G, Hakim F, Nir V, Bentur L (2021) Factors associated with complicated pneumonia in children. Pediatr Pulmonol 56(8):2700–2706
Mathews SC, McShea MJ, Hanley CL, Ravitz A, Labrique AB, Cohen AB (2019) Digital health: a path to validation. NPJ Digit Med 2(1):38
Meilik R, Ben-Assayag H, Meilik A, Berliner S, Zeltser D, Shapira I, Rogowski O, Goldiner I, Shenhar-Tsarfaty S, Wasserman A (2022) Sepsis related mortality associated with an inflammatory burst in patients admitting to the Department of Internal Medicine with apparently Normal C-reactive protein concentration. J Clin Med 11(11):3151
Moore JB (2020) From personalised nutrition to precision medicine: the rise of consumer genomics and digital health. Proc Nutr Soc 79(3):300–310
Nadhamuni S, John O, Kulkarni M, Nanda E, Venkatraman S, Varma D, Balsari S, Gudi N, Samantaray S, Reddy H, Sheel V (2021) Driving digital transformation of comprehensive primary health services at scale in India: an enterprise architecture framework. BMJ Glob Health 6(Suppl 5):e005242
Ngwa W, Addai BW, Adewole I, Ainsworth V, Alaro J, Alatise OI, Ali Z, Anderson BO, Anorlu R, Avery S, Barango P (2022) Cancer in sub-Saharan Africa: a lancet oncology commission. Lancet Oncol 23(6):e251–e312
Njuguna C, Jambai A, Chimbaru A, Nordstrom A, Conteh R, Latt A, O-tipo S, Musoke R, Githuku J, Yoti Z, Yahaya A (2019) Revitalization of integrated disease surveillance and response in Sierra Leone post Ebola virus disease outbreak. BMC Public Health 19:1–1
Ogwel B, Odhiambo-Otieno G, Otieno G, Abila J, Omore R (2022) Leveraging cloud computing for improved health service delivery: findings from public health facilities in Kisumu County, Western Kenya-2019. Learn Health Syst 6(1):e10276
Oh S, Cha J, Ji M, Kang H, Kim S, Heo E, Han JS, Kang H, Chae H, Hwang H, Yoo S (2015) Architecture design of healthcare software-as-a-service platform for cloud-based clinical decision support service. Healthc Informatics Res 21(2):102–110
Ospina-Pinillos L, Krausz RM, Hickie IB (2021) The potential of health information technologies to transform mental health care for young people in low-and middle-income countries. In: Innovations in global mental health. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 583–599
Peiris D, Praveen D, Johnson C, Mogulluru K (2014) Use of mHealth systems and tools for non-communicable diseases in low-and middle-income countries: a systematic review. J Cardiovasc Transl Res 7:677–691
Raes L, Michiels P, Adolphi T, Tampere C, Dalianis A, McAleer S, Kogut P (2021) DUET: a framework for building interoperable and trusted digital twins of smart cities. IEEE Internet Comput 26(3):43–50
Reddy S, Allan S, Coghlan S, Cooper P (2020) A governance model for the application of AI in healthcare. J Am Med Inform Assoc 27(3):491–497
Sharma Y, Verma A, Rao K, Eluri V (2020) Reasonable explainability for regulating AI in health. ORF Issue Brief 401:1–6
Uyeki TM (2008) Global epidemiology of human infections with highly pathogenic avian influenza A (H5N1) viruses. Respirology 13:S2–S9
Vodosin P, Jorgensen AK, Mendy M, Kozlakidis Z, Caboux E, Zawati MN, BCNet members. (2021) A review of regulatory frameworks governing biobanking in the low and middle income member countries of BCNet. Biopreserv Biobank 19(5):444–452
Watson PH, Nussbeck SY, Carter C, O’Donoghue S, Cheah S, Matzke LA, Barnes RO, Bartlett J, Carpenter J, Grizzle WE, Johnston RN (2014) A framework for biobank sustainability. Biopreserv Biobank 12(1):60–68
Zeng D, Chen H, Castillo-Chavez C, Thurmond M (2011) Clinical laboratory data for biosurveillance. In: Zeng D, Chen H, Castillo-Chavez C, Lober WB, Thurmond M (eds) Infectious disease informatics and biosurveillance. Springer, New York, pp 67–87
Zinsstag J, Utzinger J, Probst-Hensch N, Shan L, Zhou XN (2020) Towards integrated surveillance-response systems for the prevention of future pandemics. Infect Dis Poverty 9(05):87–92
Conflicts of Interest
NZ and RW are employees of MDClone, Israel; SN is an employee of Orthomol pharmazeutische Vertriebs GmbH, Germany. There is no financial or non-financial support for any of the authors of this chapter for their contribution to this work. All healthcare examples have been used for illustrative purposes with the information being correct at the time of publication.
Disclaimer
Where authors are identified as personnel of the International Agency for Research on Cancer/WHO, the authors alone are responsible for the views expressed in this article and they do not necessarily represent the decisions, policy or views of the International Agency for Research on Cancer/WHO.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.
Copyright information
© 2024 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Zamstein, N., Nanyonga, S., Morel, E., Wayne, R., Nottebaum, S., Kozlakidis, Z. (2024). Future Developments of Digital Health and Considerations on Sustainability. In: Kozlakidis, Z., Muradyan, A., Sargsyan, K. (eds) Digitalization of Medicine in Low- and Middle-Income Countries. Sustainable Development Goals Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-62332-5_23
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-62332-5_23
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-62331-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-62332-5
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)