在少数民族人群中实施、吸收和使用与心脏代谢疾病相关的数字健康干预的框架:范围审查

Q2 Medicine JMIR Cardio Pub Date : 2022-08-11 DOI:10.2196/37360
Mel Ramasawmy, Lydia Poole, Zareen Thorlu-Bangura, Aneesha Chauhan, Mayur Murali, Parbir Jagpal, Mehar Bijral, Jai Prashar, Abigail G-Medhin, Elizabeth Murray, Fiona Stevenson, Ann Blandford, Henry W W Potts, Kamlesh Khunti, Wasim Hanif, Paramjit Gill, Madiha Sajid, Kiran Patel, Harpreet Sood, Neeraj Bhala, Shivali Modha, Manoj Mistry, Vinod Patel, Sarah N Ali, Aftab Ala, Amitava Banerjee
{"title":"在少数民族人群中实施、吸收和使用与心脏代谢疾病相关的数字健康干预的框架:范围审查","authors":"Mel Ramasawmy, Lydia Poole, Zareen Thorlu-Bangura, Aneesha Chauhan, Mayur Murali, Parbir Jagpal, Mehar Bijral, Jai Prashar, Abigail G-Medhin, Elizabeth Murray, Fiona Stevenson, Ann Blandford, Henry W W Potts, Kamlesh Khunti, Wasim Hanif, Paramjit Gill, Madiha Sajid, Kiran Patel, Harpreet Sood, Neeraj Bhala, Shivali Modha, Manoj Mistry, Vinod Patel, Sarah N Ali, Aftab Ala, Amitava Banerjee","doi":"10.2196/37360","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Digital health interventions have become increasingly common across health care, both before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Health inequalities, particularly with respect to ethnicity, may not be considered in frameworks that address the implementation of digital health interventions. We considered frameworks to include any models, theories, or taxonomies that describe or predict implementation, uptake, and use of digital health interventions.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to assess how health inequalities are addressed in frameworks relevant to the implementation, uptake, and use of digital health interventions; health and ethnic inequalities; and interventions for cardiometabolic disease.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>SCOPUS, PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and gray literature were searched to identify papers on frameworks relevant to the implementation, uptake, and use of digital health interventions; ethnically or culturally diverse populations and health inequalities; and interventions for cardiometabolic disease. We assessed the extent to which frameworks address health inequalities, specifically ethnic inequalities; explored how they were addressed; and developed recommendations for good practice.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 58 relevant papers, 22 (38%) included frameworks that referred to health inequalities. Inequalities were conceptualized as society-level, system-level, intervention-level, and individual. Only 5 frameworks considered all levels. Three frameworks considered how digital health interventions might interact with or exacerbate existing health inequalities, and 3 considered the process of health technology implementation, uptake, and use and suggested opportunities to improve equity in digital health. When ethnicity was considered, it was often within the broader concepts of social determinants of health. Only 3 frameworks explicitly addressed ethnicity: one focused on culturally tailoring digital health interventions, and 2 were applied to management of cardiometabolic disease.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Existing frameworks evaluate implementation, uptake, and use of digital health interventions, but to consider factors related to ethnicity, it is necessary to look across frameworks. We have developed a visual guide of the key constructs across the 4 potential levels of action for digital health inequalities, which can be used to support future research and inform digital health policies.</p>","PeriodicalId":14706,"journal":{"name":"JMIR Cardio","volume":" ","pages":"e37360"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9412726/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Frameworks for Implementation, Uptake, and Use of Cardiometabolic Disease-Related Digital Health Interventions in Ethnic Minority Populations: Scoping Review.\",\"authors\":\"Mel Ramasawmy, Lydia Poole, Zareen Thorlu-Bangura, Aneesha Chauhan, Mayur Murali, Parbir Jagpal, Mehar Bijral, Jai Prashar, Abigail G-Medhin, Elizabeth Murray, Fiona Stevenson, Ann Blandford, Henry W W Potts, Kamlesh Khunti, Wasim Hanif, Paramjit Gill, Madiha Sajid, Kiran Patel, Harpreet Sood, Neeraj Bhala, Shivali Modha, Manoj Mistry, Vinod Patel, Sarah N Ali, Aftab Ala, Amitava Banerjee\",\"doi\":\"10.2196/37360\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Digital health interventions have become increasingly common across health care, both before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Health inequalities, particularly with respect to ethnicity, may not be considered in frameworks that address the implementation of digital health interventions. We considered frameworks to include any models, theories, or taxonomies that describe or predict implementation, uptake, and use of digital health interventions.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to assess how health inequalities are addressed in frameworks relevant to the implementation, uptake, and use of digital health interventions; health and ethnic inequalities; and interventions for cardiometabolic disease.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>SCOPUS, PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and gray literature were searched to identify papers on frameworks relevant to the implementation, uptake, and use of digital health interventions; ethnically or culturally diverse populations and health inequalities; and interventions for cardiometabolic disease. We assessed the extent to which frameworks address health inequalities, specifically ethnic inequalities; explored how they were addressed; and developed recommendations for good practice.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 58 relevant papers, 22 (38%) included frameworks that referred to health inequalities. Inequalities were conceptualized as society-level, system-level, intervention-level, and individual. Only 5 frameworks considered all levels. Three frameworks considered how digital health interventions might interact with or exacerbate existing health inequalities, and 3 considered the process of health technology implementation, uptake, and use and suggested opportunities to improve equity in digital health. When ethnicity was considered, it was often within the broader concepts of social determinants of health. Only 3 frameworks explicitly addressed ethnicity: one focused on culturally tailoring digital health interventions, and 2 were applied to management of cardiometabolic disease.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Existing frameworks evaluate implementation, uptake, and use of digital health interventions, but to consider factors related to ethnicity, it is necessary to look across frameworks. We have developed a visual guide of the key constructs across the 4 potential levels of action for digital health inequalities, which can be used to support future research and inform digital health policies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14706,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JMIR Cardio\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e37360\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9412726/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JMIR Cardio\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2196/37360\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR Cardio","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/37360","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在2019冠状病毒病大流行之前和期间,数字卫生干预措施在卫生保健领域越来越普遍。在处理实施数字卫生干预措施的框架中,可能不考虑保健不平等,特别是种族方面的不平等。我们认为框架包括描述或预测数字卫生干预措施的实施、吸收和使用的任何模型、理论或分类法。目的:我们旨在评估如何在与数字卫生干预措施的实施、吸收和使用相关的框架中解决卫生不平等问题;健康和种族不平等;以及对心脏代谢疾病的干预。方法:检索SCOPUS、PubMed、EMBASE、Google Scholar和灰色文献,以确定与数字健康干预措施的实施、吸收和使用相关的框架的论文;族裔或文化多样化的人口和保健不平等;以及对心脏代谢疾病的干预。我们评估了框架在多大程度上解决了健康不平等,特别是种族不平等;探索他们是如何被称呼的;并提出了良好实践的建议。结果:在58篇相关论文中,22篇(38%)包含提及健康不平等的框架。不平等被定义为社会层面、系统层面、干预层面和个人层面。只有5个框架考虑了所有级别。三个框架考虑了数字卫生干预措施可能如何与现有的卫生不平等相互作用或加剧,三个框架考虑了卫生技术的实施、吸收和使用过程,并提出了改善数字卫生公平的机会。当考虑到种族问题时,它往往属于健康的社会决定因素这一更广泛的概念。只有3个框架明确涉及种族问题:一个侧重于文化定制数字健康干预措施,2个应用于心脏代谢疾病的管理。结论:现有框架评估数字卫生干预措施的实施、吸收和使用,但为了考虑与种族有关的因素,有必要跨框架进行考察。我们为数字卫生不平等的4个潜在行动层面制定了一份关键结构的可视化指南,可用于支持未来的研究并为数字卫生政策提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Frameworks for Implementation, Uptake, and Use of Cardiometabolic Disease-Related Digital Health Interventions in Ethnic Minority Populations: Scoping Review.

Background: Digital health interventions have become increasingly common across health care, both before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Health inequalities, particularly with respect to ethnicity, may not be considered in frameworks that address the implementation of digital health interventions. We considered frameworks to include any models, theories, or taxonomies that describe or predict implementation, uptake, and use of digital health interventions.

Objective: We aimed to assess how health inequalities are addressed in frameworks relevant to the implementation, uptake, and use of digital health interventions; health and ethnic inequalities; and interventions for cardiometabolic disease.

Methods: SCOPUS, PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and gray literature were searched to identify papers on frameworks relevant to the implementation, uptake, and use of digital health interventions; ethnically or culturally diverse populations and health inequalities; and interventions for cardiometabolic disease. We assessed the extent to which frameworks address health inequalities, specifically ethnic inequalities; explored how they were addressed; and developed recommendations for good practice.

Results: Of 58 relevant papers, 22 (38%) included frameworks that referred to health inequalities. Inequalities were conceptualized as society-level, system-level, intervention-level, and individual. Only 5 frameworks considered all levels. Three frameworks considered how digital health interventions might interact with or exacerbate existing health inequalities, and 3 considered the process of health technology implementation, uptake, and use and suggested opportunities to improve equity in digital health. When ethnicity was considered, it was often within the broader concepts of social determinants of health. Only 3 frameworks explicitly addressed ethnicity: one focused on culturally tailoring digital health interventions, and 2 were applied to management of cardiometabolic disease.

Conclusions: Existing frameworks evaluate implementation, uptake, and use of digital health interventions, but to consider factors related to ethnicity, it is necessary to look across frameworks. We have developed a visual guide of the key constructs across the 4 potential levels of action for digital health inequalities, which can be used to support future research and inform digital health policies.

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 Cardio
JMIR Cardio Computer Science-Computer Science Applications
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Predicting Atrial Fibrillation Relapse Using Bayesian Networks: Explainable AI Approach. Wearable Electrocardiogram Technology: Help or Hindrance to the Modern Doctor? Technology Readiness Level and Self-Reported Health in Recipients of an Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator: Cross-Sectional Study. A Medication Management App (Smart-Meds) for Patients After an Acute Coronary Syndrome: Pilot Pre-Post Mixed Methods Study. Causal Inference for Hypertension Prediction With Wearable E lectrocardiogram and P hotoplethysmogram Signals: Feasibility 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