Exploration of Digital Health Technologies

Home
/
Exploration of Digital Health Technologies
/
Articles
/
Table 1

From: Towards the future of personalized medicine: digital twin technology

Table 1. Technical indicators for digital-twin types.

Digital-twin type	Data latency	Update frequency	Predictive capability	Decision autonomy	Data scope
Mirror twin	High latency	Intermittent updates	None	Human-only control	Physiological data only
Shadow twin	Medium–low latency	Continuous iterative updates	Limited prediction	Shared human-guided control	Physiological + medical device data
Intelligent twin	Low latency	Continuous + adaptive updates	Predictive analytics	Semi-autonomous support	Physiological + behavioral data
Simulacra twin	Near-zero latency	Continuous + generative updates	Predictive + simulation modeling	Autonomous control with human override safeguards	Physiological + behavioral + contextual data

Return to article view

Declarations

Author contributions

KM: Conceptualization, Investigation, Writing—original draft, Writing—review & editing. SB: Conceptualization, Investigation, Writing—original draft, Writing—review & editing. Both authors read and approved the submitted version.

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

Not applicable.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent to publication

Not applicable.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Funding

Not applicable.

Copyright

Publisher’s note

Open Exploration maintains a neutral stance on jurisdictional claims in published institutional affiliations and maps. All opinions expressed in this article are the personal views of the author(s) and do not represent the stance of the editorial team or the publisher.

References

Katsoulakis E, Wang Q, Wu H, Shahriyari L, Fletcher R, Liu J, et al. Digital twins for health: a scoping review. NPJ Digit Med. 2024;7:77. [DOI] [PubMed] [PMC]

Sun T, He X, Li Z. Digital twin in healthcare: Recent updates and challenges. Digit Health. 2023;9:20552076221149651. [DOI] [PubMed] [PMC]

Gkouskou K, Vlastos I, Karkalousos P, Chaniotis D, Sanoudou D, Eliopoulos AG. The “Virtual Digital Twins” Concept in Precision Nutrition. Adv Nutr. 2020;11:1405–13. [DOI] [PubMed] [PMC]

Stahlberg EA, Abdel-Rahman M, Aguilar B, Asadpoure A, Beckman RA, Borkon LL, et al. Exploring approaches for predictive cancer patient digital twins: Opportunities for collaboration and innovation. Front Digit Health. 2022;4:1007784. [DOI] [PubMed] [PMC]

Chen J, Yi C, Okegbile SD, Cai J, Shen X. Networking Architecture and Key Supporting Technologies for Human Digital Twin in Personalized Healthcare: A Comprehensive Survey. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor. 2024;26:706–46. [DOI]

Chen J, Yi C, Du H, Niyato D, Kang J, Cai J, et al. A Revolution of Personalized Healthcare: Enabling Human Digital Twin with Mobile AIGC. IEEE Netw. 2024;38:234–42. [DOI]

Yang Y, Shi Y, Yi C, Cai J, Kang J, Niyato D, et al. Dynamic Human Digital Twin Deployment at the Edge for Task Execution: A Two-Timescale Accuracy-Aware Online Optimization. IEEE Trans Mob Comput. 2024;23:12262–79. [DOI]

Rubeis G. Hyperreal Patients: Digital Twins as Simulacra and their impact on clinical heuristics. In: Loh J, Grote T, editors. Medizin – Technik – Ethik. Techno: Phil – Aktuelle Herausforderungen der Technikphilosophie. Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2023. pp. 193–207. [DOI]

Nyholm S. Should a medical digital twin be viewed as an extension of the patient’s body? J Med Ethics. 2021;47:401–2. [DOI] [PubMed]

10.

Tretter M. Perspectives on digital twins and the (im)possibilities of control. J Med Ethics. 2021;47:410–1. [DOI] [PubMed]

11.

Vaportzis E, Clausen MG, Gow AJ. Older Adults Perceptions of Technology and Barriers to Interacting with Tablet Computers: A Focus Group Study. Front Psychol. 2017;8:1687. [DOI] [PubMed] [PMC]

12.

Coorey G, Figtree GA, Fletcher DF, Redfern J. The health digital twin: advancing precision cardiovascular medicine. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2021;18:803–4. [DOI] [PubMed]