By Dr Andrew Feeney, IEEE Senior Member
There has long been a global debate on personal versus governmental responsibility for the health of an individual.
A British Social Attitudes Survey in 2017 reported that 61 percent of respondents thought that individuals had greater responsibility for their health than the government.
Today, wearable technologies for monitoring our health are widespread, and we are inundated with data every day.
Statistics exist, though they should be taken with a note of caution, indicating that there are more than 500 million smartwatch users around the world, as of 2026.
These smartwatches can now track a wide range of health indicators, including heart rate, breathing patterns, temperature, and provide assessments of sleep quality, stress level, calories expended, and blood oxygen levels.
These capabilities are not limited to watches, with similar functionalities now integrated into smart jewellery, headsets, glasses, and clothing.
There are even smart tattoos, like flexible skin patches, with integrated features capable of monitoring a range of health indicators.
There are recent reports suggesting such devices will soon be able to remotely control linked technologies, for example devices in your home, or detect early signs of degenerative conditions such as Parkinson’s or dementia.
The key point here is that the general population is now equipped with technologies capable of providing instant and accessible insights into their health, in ways they never were before and without requiring any consultation with a health professional.
Many of these metrics are presented to us in a competitive style, for example providing us with targets to reach over successive days in terms of step count or sleep quality.
The advantage of this is that it is possible to take rapid action to improve our health, in ways that can be tailored to each of us.
The disadvantages include the fact that data is not guaranteed to be accurate, that such data can be easily misinterpreted, and that a perceived lack of progress in fitness and health tracking has been noted to cause anxiety in individuals.
Nevertheless, there is an undoubted shift from reactive approaches to improving health towards preventative, where wearable technologies are at the forefront.
Given that these wearables can provide individual performance metrics, how can we ensure thoughtful, or inclusive, design to close societal inequality gaps, and with the right regulatory oversight?
Sensing for improving societal health
There is strong evidence that advancements in sensing technologies, wearables including smartwatches, and health monitoring apps, have caused a significant drive towards preventative healthcare, shifting responsibility on to the patient.
But can these technologies improve societal health at large? And what are the risks?
There is clear evidence, published in The Lancet Digital Health, that wearables and associated activity trackers have resulted in a widespread increase in physical activity across different age groups and population metrics.
There has also been evidence that social interactions have improved through the rise of wearables, because they are popular in environments such as park-runs and exercise classes, and with the potential to encourage and sustain healthy ageing across the population.
Of course, there are also major risks of these technologies that have been widely reported, including the sensitivity and security of the personal data being stored on these devices and who has access, a lack of clarity in how this data is used by commercial organisations or healthcare providers, and the oft reported intrusiveness of these technologies into daily life.
On the latter, it is possible that these technologies can cause feelings of anxiety and other related conditions, and that there is a risk of the technologies being counterproductive and demotivational.
However, the rapid rise of artificial intelligence in these technologies presents new challenges.
Safeguarding patients in the age of artificial intelligence
There are strict regulatory frameworks in existence around the world which govern medications and devices, for example in terms of their access and how data is generated and processed.
Ethics are at the heart of medical technologies, and there has been a focus on what this means for the safeguarding of patients in the age of artificial intelligence.
In 2026, the launch of Claude for Healthcare took place, and it was reported that the health data startup, Torch, has been acquired by OpenAI.
These will not likely be the last, and it is evident that artificial intelligence capabilities will only become more integrated with different areas of preventative healthcare mechanisms.
The power of artificial intelligence will be to predict the steps people, or patients, need to take as early as possible, to improve their likely health outcomes. In a positive sense, this could proactively feed into the promotion of a healthy population, but only if the data is sound.
Tools like Claude for Healthcare are intended to assist people in understanding their own health indicators, but how do we safeguard patients?
One way is transparency, ensuring there is independent oversight and accountability.
There are already developments in place for regulations, including the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) in the UK, and the NHS in the UK where there is a requirement for the completion of documents including a Data Protection Impact Assessment prior to any use of artificial intelligence.
However, it is evident that much more needs to be done to instil confidence in the general population, that data can be reliable, and used responsibly.
This leads on to another dimension of bespoke, preventative healthcare – principles of inclusive design and how we can ensure the benefits of innovation for all.
Preventative health through designing for all
Preventative health measures that benefit society and the economy will only make significant differences if the benefits of wearable devices and advanced, predictive technologies, including those informed using artificial intelligence, are available to as many people as possible.
This means that we must consider everyone, including those with disabilities, for example if some people have specific performance metrics in terms of their vision, touch, comprehension, or motion.
Data must be fully accessible, understandable, and secure.
Furthermore, it should also be customisable to every user, for example in terms of their physical condition and their cultural background.
A major step that manufacturers can implement is to include different societal communities into the engineering design from the outset of product development.
This includes the necessary underpinning research and development.
Through this, a larger proportion of the general population will be encouraged to engage with preventative healthcare technologies, thereby with the potential to significantly improve societal health.
Cambridge startup auryx secures US$2m funding
