荷兰背景下不同社会经济群体在电子健康获取、使用和感知效益方面的差异:二次横断面研究

IF 2 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES JMIR Formative Research Pub Date : 2025-01-07 DOI:10.2196/49585
Lucille Standaar, Lilian van Tuyl, Anita Suijkerbuijk, Anne Brabers, Roland Friele
{"title":"荷兰背景下不同社会经济群体在电子健康获取、使用和感知效益方面的差异:二次横断面研究","authors":"Lucille Standaar, Lilian van Tuyl, Anita Suijkerbuijk, Anne Brabers, Roland Friele","doi":"10.2196/49585","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is a growing concern that digital health care may exacerbate existing health disparities. Digital health care or eHealth encompasses the digital apps that are used in health care. Differences in access, use, and perceived benefits of digital technology among socioeconomic groups are commonly referred to as the digital divide. Current research shows that people in lower socioeconomic positions (SEPs) use eHealth less frequently.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to (1) investigate the association between SEP and eHealth access to, use of, and perceived benefit within the adult Dutch population and (2) evaluate disparities in eHealth access, use, and perceived benefit through three socioeconomic variables-education, standardized income, and the socioeconomic status of the neighborhood.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A secondary analysis was conducted on data from the Nivel Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel (response rate 57%, 849/1500), to assess access to, use of, and perceived benefits from eHealth. These data were collected to monitor eHealth developments in the Netherlands. eHealth was examined through two concepts: (1) eHealth in general and (2) websites, apps, and wearables. Results were stratified into 9 SEP populations based on 3 indicators-education, standardized income, and socioeconomic status level of the neighborhood. Logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate whether the outcomes varied significantly across different SEP groups. Age was included as a covariate to control for confounding.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This study confirms the association between eHealth and SEP and shows that low SEP respondents have less access (odds ratio [OR] 5.72, 95% CI 3.06-10.72) and use (OR 4.96, 95% CI 2.66-9.24) of eHealth compared to medium or high SEP respondents. Differences were most profound when stratifying for levels of education.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The access to and use of eHealth has a socioeconomic gradient and emphasizes that SEP indicators cannot be used interchangeably to assess eHealth access and use. The results underline the importance of activities and policies aimed at improving eHealth accessibility and usage among low SEP groups to mitigate disparities in health between different socioeconomic groups.</p>","PeriodicalId":14841,"journal":{"name":"JMIR Formative Research","volume":"9 ","pages":"e49585"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11751653/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Differences in eHealth Access, Use, and Perceived Benefit Between Different Socioeconomic Groups in the Dutch Context: Secondary Cross-Sectional Study.\",\"authors\":\"Lucille Standaar, Lilian van Tuyl, Anita Suijkerbuijk, Anne Brabers, Roland Friele\",\"doi\":\"10.2196/49585\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is a growing concern that digital health care may exacerbate existing health disparities. Digital health care or eHealth encompasses the digital apps that are used in health care. Differences in access, use, and perceived benefits of digital technology among socioeconomic groups are commonly referred to as the digital divide. Current research shows that people in lower socioeconomic positions (SEPs) use eHealth less frequently.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to (1) investigate the association between SEP and eHealth access to, use of, and perceived benefit within the adult Dutch population and (2) evaluate disparities in eHealth access, use, and perceived benefit through three socioeconomic variables-education, standardized income, and the socioeconomic status of the neighborhood.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A secondary analysis was conducted on data from the Nivel Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel (response rate 57%, 849/1500), to assess access to, use of, and perceived benefits from eHealth. These data were collected to monitor eHealth developments in the Netherlands. eHealth was examined through two concepts: (1) eHealth in general and (2) websites, apps, and wearables. Results were stratified into 9 SEP populations based on 3 indicators-education, standardized income, and socioeconomic status level of the neighborhood. Logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate whether the outcomes varied significantly across different SEP groups. Age was included as a covariate to control for confounding.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This study confirms the association between eHealth and SEP and shows that low SEP respondents have less access (odds ratio [OR] 5.72, 95% CI 3.06-10.72) and use (OR 4.96, 95% CI 2.66-9.24) of eHealth compared to medium or high SEP respondents. Differences were most profound when stratifying for levels of education.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The access to and use of eHealth has a socioeconomic gradient and emphasizes that SEP indicators cannot be used interchangeably to assess eHealth access and use. The results underline the importance of activities and policies aimed at improving eHealth accessibility and usage among low SEP groups to mitigate disparities in health between different socioeconomic groups.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14841,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JMIR Formative Research\",\"volume\":\"9 \",\"pages\":\"e49585\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11751653/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JMIR Formative Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2196/49585\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR Formative Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/49585","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:越来越多的人担心数字医疗可能会加剧现有的健康差距。数字医疗保健或电子医疗包括在医疗保健中使用的数字应用程序。社会经济群体在获取、使用和感知数字技术利益方面的差异通常被称为数字鸿沟。目前的研究表明,社会经济地位较低的人使用电子健康的频率较低。目的:本研究旨在(1)调查成人荷兰人群中SEP与电子健康获取、使用和感知效益之间的关系;(2)通过三个社会经济变量(教育、标准化收入和社区社会经济地位)评估电子健康获取、使用和感知效益的差异。方法:对Nivel荷兰医疗保健消费者小组的数据(回复率为57%,849/1500)进行二次分析,以评估电子健康的获取、使用和感知效益。收集这些数据是为了监测荷兰电子卫生的发展情况。eHealth通过两个概念进行了研究:(1)一般的eHealth和(2)网站、应用程序和可穿戴设备。结果根据受教育程度、标准化收入和社区社会经济地位水平3个指标划分为9个SEP人群。采用Logistic回归分析来评估不同SEP组的结果是否有显著差异。年龄作为一个协变量来控制混杂。结果:本研究证实了电子健康与SEP之间的关联,并且表明与中等或高SEP的受访者相比,低SEP的受访者较少获得电子健康(比值比[OR] 5.72, 95% CI 3.06-10.72)和使用电子健康(OR 4.96, 95% CI 2.66-9.24)。在按教育水平分层时,差异最为显著。结论:电子健康的获取和使用具有社会经济梯度,并强调SEP指标不能互换使用来评估电子健康的获取和使用。这些结果强调了旨在改善低SEP群体的电子健康可及性和使用的活动和政策的重要性,以减轻不同社会经济群体之间的健康差距。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Differences in eHealth Access, Use, and Perceived Benefit Between Different Socioeconomic Groups in the Dutch Context: Secondary Cross-Sectional Study.

Background: There is a growing concern that digital health care may exacerbate existing health disparities. Digital health care or eHealth encompasses the digital apps that are used in health care. Differences in access, use, and perceived benefits of digital technology among socioeconomic groups are commonly referred to as the digital divide. Current research shows that people in lower socioeconomic positions (SEPs) use eHealth less frequently.

Objective: This study aims to (1) investigate the association between SEP and eHealth access to, use of, and perceived benefit within the adult Dutch population and (2) evaluate disparities in eHealth access, use, and perceived benefit through three socioeconomic variables-education, standardized income, and the socioeconomic status of the neighborhood.

Methods: A secondary analysis was conducted on data from the Nivel Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel (response rate 57%, 849/1500), to assess access to, use of, and perceived benefits from eHealth. These data were collected to monitor eHealth developments in the Netherlands. eHealth was examined through two concepts: (1) eHealth in general and (2) websites, apps, and wearables. Results were stratified into 9 SEP populations based on 3 indicators-education, standardized income, and socioeconomic status level of the neighborhood. Logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate whether the outcomes varied significantly across different SEP groups. Age was included as a covariate to control for confounding.

Results: This study confirms the association between eHealth and SEP and shows that low SEP respondents have less access (odds ratio [OR] 5.72, 95% CI 3.06-10.72) and use (OR 4.96, 95% CI 2.66-9.24) of eHealth compared to medium or high SEP respondents. Differences were most profound when stratifying for levels of education.

Conclusions: The access to and use of eHealth has a socioeconomic gradient and emphasizes that SEP indicators cannot be used interchangeably to assess eHealth access and use. The results underline the importance of activities and policies aimed at improving eHealth accessibility and usage among low SEP groups to mitigate disparities in health between different socioeconomic groups.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
JMIR Formative Research
JMIR Formative Research Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
9.10%
发文量
579
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Technological Adjuncts to Streamline Patient Recruitment, Informed Consent, and Data Management Processes in Clinical Research: Observational Study. Understanding Health-Related Discussions on Reddit: Development of a Topic Assignment Method and Exploratory Analysis. A Digital Tool (Technology-Assisted Problem Management Plus) for Lay Health Workers to Address Common Mental Health Disorders: Co-production and Usability Study in Pakistan. Engagement With an Internet-Administered, Guided, Low-Intensity Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Intervention for Parents of Children Treated for Cancer: Analysis of Log-Data From the ENGAGE Feasibility Trial. Factors Influencing Telemedicine Adoption Among Health Care Professionals: Qualitative Interview Study.
×
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