Addressing disparities: A systematic review of digital health equity for adolescent obesity prevention and management interventions

IF 8 2区 医学 Q1 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM Obesity Reviews Pub Date : 2024-09-11 DOI:10.1111/obr.13821
Stephanie R. Partridge, Amber Knight, Allyson Todd, Bronwyn McGill, Sara Wardak, Laura Alston, Katherine M. Livingstone, Anna Singleton, Louise Thornton, Sisi Jia, Julie Redfern, Rebecca Raeside
{"title":"Addressing disparities: A systematic review of digital health equity for adolescent obesity prevention and management interventions","authors":"Stephanie R. Partridge, Amber Knight, Allyson Todd, Bronwyn McGill, Sara Wardak, Laura Alston, Katherine M. Livingstone, Anna Singleton, Louise Thornton, Sisi Jia, Julie Redfern, Rebecca Raeside","doi":"10.1111/obr.13821","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"SummaryAdolescence is a high‐risk life stage for obesity. Digital strategies are needed to prevent and manage obesity among adolescents. We assessed if digital health interventions are contributing to disparities in obesity outcomes and assessed the adequacy of reporting of digital health equity criteria across four levels of influence within the digital environment. The systematic search was conducted on 10 major electronic databases and limited to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or cluster‐RCTs for prevention or management of obesity among 10–19 year olds. Primary outcome was mean body mass index (BMI), or BMI <jats:italic>z</jats:italic>‐score change. The Adapted Digital Health Equity Assessment Framework was applied to all studies. Thirty‐three articles (27 unique studies with 8483 participants) were identified, with only eight studies targeting adolescents from disadvantaged populations. Post‐intervention, only three studies reported significantly lower BMI outcomes in the intervention compared to control. Of the 432 digital health equity criteria assessed across 27 studies, 82% of criteria were “not addressed.” Studies are not addressing digital health equity criteria or inadequately reporting information to assess if digital health interventions are contributing to disparities in obesity outcomes. Enhanced reporting is needed to inform decision‐makers and support the development of equitable interventions to prevent and manage obesity among adolescents.","PeriodicalId":216,"journal":{"name":"Obesity Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Obesity Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/obr.13821","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

SummaryAdolescence is a high‐risk life stage for obesity. Digital strategies are needed to prevent and manage obesity among adolescents. We assessed if digital health interventions are contributing to disparities in obesity outcomes and assessed the adequacy of reporting of digital health equity criteria across four levels of influence within the digital environment. The systematic search was conducted on 10 major electronic databases and limited to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or cluster‐RCTs for prevention or management of obesity among 10–19 year olds. Primary outcome was mean body mass index (BMI), or BMI z‐score change. The Adapted Digital Health Equity Assessment Framework was applied to all studies. Thirty‐three articles (27 unique studies with 8483 participants) were identified, with only eight studies targeting adolescents from disadvantaged populations. Post‐intervention, only three studies reported significantly lower BMI outcomes in the intervention compared to control. Of the 432 digital health equity criteria assessed across 27 studies, 82% of criteria were “not addressed.” Studies are not addressing digital health equity criteria or inadequately reporting information to assess if digital health interventions are contributing to disparities in obesity outcomes. Enhanced reporting is needed to inform decision‐makers and support the development of equitable interventions to prevent and manage obesity among adolescents.
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
缩小差距:青少年肥胖症预防和管理干预措施的数字健康公平性系统审查
摘要青春期是肥胖症的高危期。预防和管理青少年肥胖症需要数字化策略。我们评估了数字健康干预措施是否会导致肥胖结果的差异,并评估了数字环境中四个影响层面的数字健康公平标准报告的充分性。系统性检索在 10 个主要电子数据库中进行,仅限于 10-19 岁青少年肥胖症预防或管理的随机对照试验 (RCT) 或分组 RCT。主要结果为平均体重指数 (BMI) 或 BMI Z 值变化。所有研究均采用了经调整的数字健康公平评估框架。共发现了 33 篇文章(27 项独特的研究,共有 8483 名参与者),其中只有 8 项研究的对象是来自弱势群体的青少年。干预后,仅有三项研究报告称,与对照组相比,干预组的 BMI 结果明显较低。在 27 项研究评估的 432 项数字健康公平标准中,82% 的标准 "未涉及"。这些研究未涉及数字健康公平标准或未充分报告相关信息,以评估数字健康干预措施是否会导致肥胖结果的差异。需要加强报告,以便为决策者提供信息,支持制定公平的干预措施,预防和控制青少年肥胖。
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
Obesity Reviews
Obesity Reviews 医学-内分泌学与代谢
CiteScore
19.30
自引率
1.10%
发文量
130
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Obesity Reviews is a monthly journal publishing reviews on all disciplines related to obesity and its comorbidities. This includes basic and behavioral sciences, clinical treatment and outcomes, epidemiology, prevention and public health. The journal should, therefore, appeal to all professionals with an interest in obesity and its comorbidities. Review types may include systematic narrative reviews, quantitative meta-analyses and narrative reviews but all must offer new insights, critical or novel perspectives that will enhance the state of knowledge in the field. The editorial policy is to publish high quality peer-reviewed manuscripts that provide needed new insight into all aspects of obesity and its related comorbidities while minimizing the period between submission and publication.
期刊最新文献
The vices and virtues of medical models of obesity Show me the evidence to guide nutrition practice: Scoping review of macronutrient dietary treatments after metabolic and bariatric surgery Addressing disparities: A systematic review of digital health equity for adolescent obesity prevention and management interventions The change in food service costs associated with increasing the healthiness of ready‐to‐eat food provision: A systematic scoping review Integration of observational and causal evidence for the association between adiposity and 17 gastrointestinal outcomes: An umbrella review and meta-analysis.
×
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