We wrote last week that, at MobiHealthNews 2016, Duke Director of Mobile Strategy Dr. Ricky Bloomfield brought breaking news from WWDCthat Apple would soon add HealthKit support for the HL7 Continuity of Care Document to iOS 10.
But that tidbit, exciting as it was, was only a small part of Bloomfield’s talk, in which he shared some early anecdotes and triumphs from Duke’s early forays into both HealthKit and Apple ResearchKit. First though, he spoke about why he thinks Apple has outshined its competitors in this regard.
“The reason Apple and Google come to the top is because in order for this to be meaningful, it has to be on a device that you’re carrying with you,” Bloomfield said. “And of course, most people have an iOS or an Android device. A third party platform is never going to get traction because the way these devices and operating systems are now designed, the framework for healthcare has to be built into the framework of the operating system. And the reason that has to happen is primarily one of security: Only the OS creator can manage that security of exchanging data between different applications in a way that is beneficial to the consumer.”
Between Apple and Google, Apple has seen more adoption for HealthKit than Google has for Google Fit, its comparable offering. Bloomfield offered a theory as to why that might be.
“Apple standardized a set of data elements so everyone could use those in a consistent way. And it’s interesting that we talk about open standards but there can be closed standards too. This is technically a closed standard, but because of the fact that it was made available for anyone to use free of charge, it became a way you could transfer high-quality information, which made it usable,” Bloomfield said. “Whereas on the Google side, they didn’t have the same level of granularity for their data elements and actually kept it much more open in terms of being able to define your own data elements. But of course any time you can define your own data elements and you leave it much more open, that optionality, as we call it, makes it much harder to standardize and to share data.”