A preregistered vignette experiment on determinants of health data sharing behavior Willingness to donate sensor data, medical records, and biomarkers.

The COVID-19 pandemic has spotlighted the importance of high-quality data for empirical health research and evidence-based political decision-making. To leverage the full potential of these data, a better understanding of the determinants and conditions under which people are willing to share their health data is critical. Building on the privacy theory of contextual integrity, the privacy calculus, and previous findings regarding different data types and recipients, we argue that established social norms shape the acceptance of novel practices of data collection and use. To investigate the willingness to share health data, we conducted a preregistered vignette experiment. The scenarios experimentally varied the vignette dimensions by data type, recipient, and research purpose. While some findings contradict our hypotheses, the results indicate that all three dimensions affected respondents' data sharing decisions. Additional analyses suggest that institutional and social trust, privacy concerns, technical affinity, altruism, age, and device ownership influence the willingness to share health data.

Population mental health in Burma after 2021 military coup: online non-probability survey.

BACKGROUND: Humanitarian crises and armed conflicts lead to a greater prevalence of poor population mental health. Following the 1 February 2021 military coup in Burma, the country's civilians have faced humanitarian crises that have probably caused rising rates of mental disorders. However, a dearth of data has prevented researchers from assessing the extent of the problem empirically. AIMS: To better understand prevalence of depressive and anxiety disorders among the Burmese adult population after the February 2021 military coup. METHOD: We fielded an online non-probability survey of 7720 Burmese adults aged 18 and older during October 2021 and asked mental health and demographic questions. We used the Patient Health Questionnaire-4 to measure probable depression and anxiety in respondents. We also estimated logistic regressions to assess variations in probable depression and anxiety across demographic subgroups and by level of trust in various media sources, including those operated by the Burmese military establishment. RESULTS: We found consistently high rates of probable anxiety and depression combined (60.71%), probable depression (61%) and probable anxiety (58%) in the sample overall, as well as across demographic subgroups. Respondents who 'mostly' or 'completely' trusted military-affiliated media sources (about 3% of the sample) were significantly less likely than respondents who did not trust these sources to report symptoms of anxiety and depression (AOR = 0.574; 95% CI 0.370-0.889), depression (AOR = 0.590; 95% CI 0.383-0.908) or anxiety (AOR = 0.609; 95% CI 0.390-0.951). CONCLUSIONS: The widespread symptoms of anxiety and depression we observed demonstrate the need for both continuous surveillance of the current situation and humanitarian interventions to address mental health needs in Burma.

From fair predictions to just decisions? Conceptualizing algorithmic fairness and distributive justice in the context of data-driven decision-making.

Prediction algorithms are regularly used to support and automate high-stakes policy decisions about the allocation of scarce public resources. However, data-driven decision-making raises problems of algorithmic fairness and justice. So far, fairness and justice are frequently conflated, with the consequence that distributive justice concerns are not addressed explicitly. In this paper, we approach this issue by distinguishing (a) fairness as a property of the algorithm used for the prediction task from (b) justice as a property of the allocation principle used for the decision task in data-driven decision-making. The distinction highlights the different logic underlying concerns about fairness and justice and permits a more systematic investigation of the interrelations between the two concepts. We propose a new notion of algorithmic fairness called error fairness which requires prediction errors to not differ systematically across individuals. Drawing on sociological and philosophical discourse on local justice, we present a principled way to include distributive justice concerns into data-driven decision-making. We propose that allocation principles are just if they adhere to well-justified distributive justice principles. Moving beyond the one-sided focus on algorithmic fairness, we thereby make a first step toward the explicit implementation of distributive justice into data-driven decision-making.

Humans versus machines: Who is perceived to decide fairer? Experimental evidence on attitudes toward automated decision-making.

Human perceptions of fairness in (semi-)automated decision-making (ADM) constitute a crucial building block toward developing human-centered ADM solutions. However, measuring fairness perceptions is challenging because various context and design characteristics of ADM systems need to be disentangled. Particularly, ADM applications need to use the right degree of automation and granularity of data input to achieve efficiency and public acceptance. We present results from a large-scale vignette experiment that assessed fairness perceptions and the acceptability of ADM systems. The experiment varied context and design dimensions, with an emphasis on who makes the final decision. We show that automated recommendations in combination with a final human decider are perceived as fair as decisions made by a dominant human decider and as fairer than decisions made only by an algorithm. Our results shed light on the context dependence of fairness assessments and show that semi-automation of decision-making processes is often desirable.

Studying health-related internet and mobile device use using web logs and smartphone records.

Many people use the internet to seek information that will help them understand their body and their health. Motivations for such behaviors are numerous. For example, users may wish to figure out a medical condition by searching for symptoms they experience. Similarly, they may seek more information on how to treat conditions they have been diagnosed with or seek resources on how to live a healthy life. With the ubiquitous availability of the internet, searching and finding relevant information is easier than ever before and a widespread phenomenon. To understand how people use the internet for health-related information, we use data from a sample of 1,959 internet users. A unique combination of data containing four months of users' browsing histories and mobile application use on computers and mobile devices allows us to study which health websites they visited, what information they searched for and which health applications they used. Survey data inform us about users' socio-demographic background, medical conditions and other health-related behaviors. Results show that women, young users, users with a university education and nonsmokers are most likely to use the internet and mobile applications for health-related purposes. On search engines, internet users most frequently search for pharmacies, symptoms of medical conditions and pain. Moreover, users seem most interested in information on how to live a healthy life, alternative medicine, mental health and women's health. With this study, we extend the field's understanding of who seeks and consumes health information online, what users look for as well as how individuals use mobile applications to monitor their health. Moreover, we contribute to methodological research by exploring new sources of data for understanding humans, their preferences and behaviors.

Acceptability of App-Based Contact Tracing for COVID-19: Cross-Country Survey Study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic is the greatest public health crisis of the last 100 years. Countries have responded with various levels of lockdown to save lives and stop health systems from being overwhelmed. At the same time, lockdowns entail large socioeconomic costs. One exit strategy under consideration is a mobile phone app that traces the close contacts of those infected with COVID-19. Recent research has demonstrated the theoretical effectiveness of this solution in different disease settings. However, concerns have been raised about such apps because of the potential privacy implications. This could limit the acceptability of app-based contact tracing in the general population. As the effectiveness of this approach increases strongly with app uptake, it is crucial to understand public support for this intervention. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to investigate the user acceptability of a contact-tracing app in five countries hit by the pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a largescale, multicountry study (N=5995) to measure public support for the digital contact tracing of COVID-19 infections. We ran anonymous online surveys in France, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, and the United States. We measured intentions to use a contact-tracing app across different installation regimes (voluntary installation vs automatic installation by mobile phone providers) and studied how these intentions vary across individuals and countries. RESULTS: We found strong support for the app under both regimes, in all countries, across all subgroups of the population, and irrespective of regional-level COVID-19 mortality rates. We investigated the main factors that may hinder or facilitate uptake and found that concerns about cybersecurity and privacy, together with a lack of trust in the government, are the main barriers to adoption. CONCLUSIONS: Epidemiological evidence shows that app-based contact tracing can suppress the spread of COVID-19 if a high enough proportion of the population uses the app and that it can still reduce the number of infections if uptake is moderate. Our findings show that the willingness to install the app is very high. The available evidence suggests that app-based contact tracing may be a viable approach to control the diffusion of COVID-19.