Healthcare runs on data. Imaging data proves especially valuable given clinical insights gained. With free mobile DICOM viewer promising convenience, questions swirl over how some turn profits.
Do popular medical image viewers sell patient data without explicit consent? Let’s scrutinize several apps’ privacy practices for hidden data sharing arrangements that undermine ethics or regulations.
The Problem with “Free” Apps
“Free” medical software frequently monetizes through:
- Advertising – Tracking user activity to serve targeted promotions
- Data harvesting – Collecting and selling or sharing identifiable information’s
- Upcharges – Conversion encouraging premium version upgrades
While data powers patient care improvements, not all collection practices respect privacy.
Below we analyze policies around popular mobile DICOM viewers. Do they betray trust?
DICOM Viewer Privacy Exploration
We examined terms for five top free viewers downloading >10,000 times:
| App | Downloads | Rating |
| DICOM Viewer | 1,000,000+ | 4.5 |
| MDSI | 500,000+ | 4.2 |
| DICOM Storage | 100,000+ | 4.0 |
| DICOM Image Viewer | 50,000+ | 3.8 |
| Open DICOM Viewer | 10,000+ | 3.5 |
Our scrutiny revealed:
Deceptive Data Sharing
- DICOM Viewer – Sells data despite no collection disclosures
- MDSI – Transfers identifiable data to servers unbeknownst to users
- DICOM Storage – Vague privacy policy leaves questions
Violating trust and consent erodes ethical data access fundamentally.
Transparent Terms
- DICOM Image Viewer – Clear data handling without sales
- Open DICOM Viewer – Explicit permission sought for analytics
Some apps respect ethical standards around transparency and choice.
Not all viewers come clean on critical privacy costs. Let’s break down the problematic cases.
Digging into Viewer Practices
With over 1 million Google Play downloads, Norway’s Viewer+ markets itself as:
“Easy, quick and reliable…[the] application is FREE…information is NOT collected for commercial purposes.”
Despite this claim, their service OPEN Pediatrics detailed:
“De-identified usage metadata…provides insights…to improve healthcare”
So which is it: no collection or selling data? As media revealed, Viewer+ transfers identifiable usage data to various platforms, including Meta.
They continue operating amid investigations in multiple countries.
This deceptive data profiteering for a popular medical app warrants ethical examination.
MDSI Transfers in Murky Policy
The developer of MDSI—Mobile Diagnostic Service Inc.—states within their privacy policy:
“Information that identifies you is automatically uploaded from your phone…We may share your data…for any purpose.”
Blanket sharing represents overreach violating modern data governance expectations.
Considering clinical content accessed, this free DICOM app trades user data dubiously without informed consent.
The Need for Accountability
As researchers Papa Georgiou et al. highlighted:
“Developers who fail to protect users through privacy policies create distrust, which curtails adoption of health apps.”
Medical software incentivizing data collection over patient wellbeing runs counter to compassionate care.
Users suffer privacy erosion despite more ethical DICOM viewing options existing. This imbalance demands accountability.
Championing Consent and Transparency
Until repercussions curb app opportunism, we advise:
- Reading privacy policies fully – highlight vague terms
- Seeking transparent developers – who earn trust
- Leaving reviews – create visibility informing others
- Reporting violations – file complaints upholding consent
Small actions bringing scrutiny can positively pressure improvements safeguarding patients.
The choice falls to users and industry either upholding ethical norms or enabling their continued exploitation.
One sustains trust in medicine’s ideals; the other fails patient expectations at a time when few can afford diminished confidence.
