Digital health technologies and inequalities: A scoping review of potential impacts and policy recommendations

IF 3.6 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Health Policy Pub Date : 2024-07-02 DOI:10.1016/j.healthpol.2024.105122
Janine Badr , Aude Motulsky , Jean-Louis Denis
{"title":"Digital health technologies and inequalities: A scoping review of potential impacts and policy recommendations","authors":"Janine Badr ,&nbsp;Aude Motulsky ,&nbsp;Jean-Louis Denis","doi":"10.1016/j.healthpol.2024.105122","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Digital health technologies hold promises for reducing health care costs, enhancing access to care, and addressing labor shortages. However, they risk exacerbating inequalities by disproportionately benefitting a subset of the population<strong>.</strong> Use of digital technologies accelerated during the Covid-19 pandemic. Our scoping review aimed to describe how inequalities related to their use were conceptually assessed during and after the pandemic and understand how digital strategies and policies might support digital equity. We used the PRISMA Extension for scoping reviews, identifying 2055 papers through an initial search of 3 databases in 2021 and complementary search in 2022, of which 41 were retained. Analysis was guided by the eHealth equity framework. Results showed that digital inequalities were reported in the U.S. and other high-income countries and were mainly assessed through differences in access and use according to individual sociodemographic characteristics. Health disparities related to technology use and the interaction between context and technology implementation were more rarely documented. Policy recommendations stressed the adoption of an equity lens in strategy development and multilayered and intersectoral collaboration to align interventions with the needs of specific subgroups. Finally, findings suggested that evaluations of health and wellbeing distribution related to the use of digital technologies should inform digital strategies and health policies.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":55067,"journal":{"name":"Health Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168851024001325/pdfft?md5=a9aec34cbff9dffa3912b45c15cd415e&pid=1-s2.0-S0168851024001325-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168851024001325","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Digital health technologies hold promises for reducing health care costs, enhancing access to care, and addressing labor shortages. However, they risk exacerbating inequalities by disproportionately benefitting a subset of the population. Use of digital technologies accelerated during the Covid-19 pandemic. Our scoping review aimed to describe how inequalities related to their use were conceptually assessed during and after the pandemic and understand how digital strategies and policies might support digital equity. We used the PRISMA Extension for scoping reviews, identifying 2055 papers through an initial search of 3 databases in 2021 and complementary search in 2022, of which 41 were retained. Analysis was guided by the eHealth equity framework. Results showed that digital inequalities were reported in the U.S. and other high-income countries and were mainly assessed through differences in access and use according to individual sociodemographic characteristics. Health disparities related to technology use and the interaction between context and technology implementation were more rarely documented. Policy recommendations stressed the adoption of an equity lens in strategy development and multilayered and intersectoral collaboration to align interventions with the needs of specific subgroups. Finally, findings suggested that evaluations of health and wellbeing distribution related to the use of digital technologies should inform digital strategies and health policies.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
数字医疗技术与不平等:对潜在影响和政策建议的范围审查。
数字医疗技术有望降低医疗成本,提高医疗服务的可及性,并解决劳动力短缺问题。然而,它们也有可能使一部分人受益过多,从而加剧不平等现象。在 Covid-19 大流行期间,数字技术的使用速度加快。我们的范围界定综述旨在描述大流行期间和之后如何从概念上评估与数字技术使用相关的不平等现象,并了解数字战略和政策可如何支持数字公平。我们使用了范围界定综述的 PRISMA 扩展工具,通过 2021 年对 3 个数据库的初步检索和 2022 年的补充检索,确定了 2055 篇论文,并保留了其中的 41 篇。分析以电子健康公平框架为指导。结果显示,美国和其他高收入国家都有关于数字不平等的报道,主要通过个人社会人口特征在获取和使用方面的差异来评估。与技术使用相关的健康差异以及环境与技术实施之间的相互作用则鲜有记录。政策建议强调在制定战略时采用公平视角,开展多层次和跨部门合作,使干预措施符合特定亚群体的需求。最后,研究结果表明,对与数字技术使用有关的健康和福祉分布情况的评估应为数字战略和健康政策提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Health Policy
Health Policy 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
6.10%
发文量
157
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Policy is intended to be a vehicle for the exploration and discussion of health policy and health system issues and is aimed in particular at enhancing communication between health policy and system researchers, legislators, decision-makers and professionals concerned with developing, implementing, and analysing health policy, health systems and health care reforms, primarily in high-income countries outside the U.S.A.
期刊最新文献
Identifying health inequities faced by older adults with rare diseases: A systematic literature review and proposal for an ethical spectrum and resource allocation framework Exploring assisted dying policies for mature minors: A cross jurisdiction comparison of the Netherlands, Belgium & Canada Health effects of introducing an unconditional child benefit in Poland: Evidence from a difference in differences analysis Freedom of choice for specialized consultation in Portugal: An observational analysis of response to hospital quality Enhancing rural community engagement through palliative care networks: A scoping review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1