Explore & master

3 questions to Loick Menvielle on the new Barometer dedicated to connected health

Loick Menvielle , Professor, Management in Innovative Health Chair Director

As part of the publication of the 1st Barometer "Perception of the French on connected health*" (in French) of the Management in Innovative Health chair (Bristol Myers Squibb, EDHEC), Loick Menvielle, professor at EDHEC and director of this chair, presents the objective and reviews some of the salient elements.

Reading time :
30 Jan 2023

Why did you think it was relevant to carry out a barometer on connected health*?

Firstly, because the last surveys of this type were beginning to be dated, particularly in view of the importance of connected objects since the mid-2010s. On the other hand, because the subject of innovation in health, essentially through connected health, is at the heart of the work of our research chair launched last year by Bristol Myers Squibb and EDHEC Business School, a chair based in particular on the conviction that innovative health cannot be achieved without inclusiveness, and vice versa. But to better understand this, we first had to ask the French about their perception of the various aspects of connected health.


The barometer highlights an element that is not very present in the public debate: the risk of medical drop-out for victims of illiteracy. Could you tell us more about this?

Indeed, this Ipsos survey clearly shows that connected objects and services in the health sector are not "miracle" solutions. While they are an Eldorado for many private players, they prove to be inaccessible for nearly 1 in 5 French people who are victims of illectronism. Investing massively in connected health will therefore automatically be accompanied by an increase in disparities. If we do not sufficiently rethink policies on care, dependency, prevention, etc., this personalised and participatory medicine - because it is connected - may not benefit (or may benefit too little) millions of French people, whose profiles identified by this barometer will no doubt not surprise you: the "digitally excluded" are rather old, female, living in rural areas and having a level of education below the baccalaureate.


Which results surprised you the most?

I was challenged by the section on the perception of the legitimacy of public or private health players who offer connected solutions. While the volume of health data transmitted, voluntarily or not, to the famous GAFAMs, is constantly increasing, only 7% of the people questioned recognised their legitimacy. Similarly, confidence in an algorithmic approach to diagnosis and treatment is very low (less than 10%), despite the promising prospects of these technologies applied to health. The doctor remains the reference point, with 3 out of 4 people who have "extreme confidence" in him/her. As a researcher, however, it is the third option, with less than 20% of people in favour, that seems to me to be the way forward: that of a combination of the human being and digital technology in its broadest sense (big data, algorithms, artificial intelligence, etc.), with the former being able to redeploy its time and focus more on the patient by relying on a fine and responsible use of the latter.


* Connected health includes all new technologies - connected objects, platforms, applications, etc. - aimed at improving patients' health, including telemedicine, telehealth and m-health.


Go further

Other items you may be
interested in


Climate change: Why are infrastructure investors aware of the risk while failing to measure it?

  • Noël Amenc , Associate Professor of Finance
  • Frédéric Blanc-Brude , EDHEC Infra and Private Assets Research Institute Director and CEO (Scientific Infra and Private Assets Ltd)
  • Alice James , EDHEC Infrastructure & Private Assets Research Institute