炒作、证据差距和数字鸿沟:澳大利亚农村的远程医疗盲点。

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Health Pub Date : 2023-07-01 DOI:10.1177/13634593211060763
Deborah Warr, Georgina Luscombe, Danielle Couch
{"title":"炒作、证据差距和数字鸿沟:澳大利亚农村的远程医疗盲点。","authors":"Deborah Warr,&nbsp;Georgina Luscombe,&nbsp;Danielle Couch","doi":"10.1177/13634593211060763","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Despite high unmet demand for health services across rural Australia, uptake of telehealth has been slow, piecemeal and ad hoc. We argue that widespread failure to understand telehealth as a socio-technical practice is key to understanding this slow progress. To develop this argument, we explore how technocentric approaches to telehealth have contributed to critical blind spots. First, the 'hype' associated with the technological possibilities of telehealth discourages thoughtful consideration of the unanticipated consequences when technologies are rolled out into complex social fields. Second, it contributes to critical gaps in the telehealth evidence base, and particularly a paucity of analyses focussing on the experiences of service users and patients. A third blind spot concerns the limited attention paid to the social determinants of health and digital divides in rural areas. The final blind spot we consider is an apparent reluctance to engage community stakeholders in co-designing and coproducing telehealth services. We used an iterative approach to identify studies and commentary from a range of academic fields to explain the significance of the telehealth blind spots and how they might be addressed. Insights suggest how expanding understanding of the social dimensions of telehealth could enhance its accessibility, effectiveness and responsiveness to community needs and contexts.</p>","PeriodicalId":12944,"journal":{"name":"Health","volume":"27 4","pages":"588-606"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hype, evidence gaps and digital divides: Telehealth blind spots in rural Australia.\",\"authors\":\"Deborah Warr,&nbsp;Georgina Luscombe,&nbsp;Danielle Couch\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/13634593211060763\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Despite high unmet demand for health services across rural Australia, uptake of telehealth has been slow, piecemeal and ad hoc. We argue that widespread failure to understand telehealth as a socio-technical practice is key to understanding this slow progress. To develop this argument, we explore how technocentric approaches to telehealth have contributed to critical blind spots. First, the 'hype' associated with the technological possibilities of telehealth discourages thoughtful consideration of the unanticipated consequences when technologies are rolled out into complex social fields. Second, it contributes to critical gaps in the telehealth evidence base, and particularly a paucity of analyses focussing on the experiences of service users and patients. A third blind spot concerns the limited attention paid to the social determinants of health and digital divides in rural areas. The final blind spot we consider is an apparent reluctance to engage community stakeholders in co-designing and coproducing telehealth services. We used an iterative approach to identify studies and commentary from a range of academic fields to explain the significance of the telehealth blind spots and how they might be addressed. Insights suggest how expanding understanding of the social dimensions of telehealth could enhance its accessibility, effectiveness and responsiveness to community needs and contexts.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12944,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health\",\"volume\":\"27 4\",\"pages\":\"588-606\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/13634593211060763\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13634593211060763","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

尽管澳大利亚农村地区对保健服务的需求未得到满足,但采用远程保健的速度缓慢、零碎和临时。我们认为,普遍未能理解远程医疗作为一种社会技术实践是理解这一缓慢进展的关键。为了发展这一论点,我们探讨了以技术为中心的远程医疗方法是如何导致关键盲点的。首先,与远程医疗技术可能性相关的“炒作”阻碍了对技术推广到复杂的社会领域时意想不到的后果的深思熟虑。其次,它造成了远程保健证据基础的严重空白,特别是缺乏侧重于服务使用者和患者经验的分析。第三个盲点涉及对农村地区健康的社会决定因素和数字鸿沟的关注有限。我们考虑的最后一个盲点是明显不愿意让社区利益相关者参与共同设计和共同生产远程医疗服务。我们使用了一种迭代的方法来识别来自一系列学术领域的研究和评论,以解释远程医疗盲点的重要性以及如何解决这些盲点。这些见解表明,扩大对远程保健的社会层面的了解如何能够提高其可及性、有效性和对社区需求和情况的响应。
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
Hype, evidence gaps and digital divides: Telehealth blind spots in rural Australia.

Despite high unmet demand for health services across rural Australia, uptake of telehealth has been slow, piecemeal and ad hoc. We argue that widespread failure to understand telehealth as a socio-technical practice is key to understanding this slow progress. To develop this argument, we explore how technocentric approaches to telehealth have contributed to critical blind spots. First, the 'hype' associated with the technological possibilities of telehealth discourages thoughtful consideration of the unanticipated consequences when technologies are rolled out into complex social fields. Second, it contributes to critical gaps in the telehealth evidence base, and particularly a paucity of analyses focussing on the experiences of service users and patients. A third blind spot concerns the limited attention paid to the social determinants of health and digital divides in rural areas. The final blind spot we consider is an apparent reluctance to engage community stakeholders in co-designing and coproducing telehealth services. We used an iterative approach to identify studies and commentary from a range of academic fields to explain the significance of the telehealth blind spots and how they might be addressed. Insights suggest how expanding understanding of the social dimensions of telehealth could enhance its accessibility, effectiveness and responsiveness to community needs and contexts.

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
Health
Health Multiple-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Health: is published four times per year and attempts in each number to offer a mix of articles that inform or that provoke debate. The readership of the journal is wide and drawn from different disciplines and from workers both inside and outside the health care professions. Widely abstracted, Health: ensures authors an extensive and informed readership for their work. It also seeks to offer authors as short a delay as possible between submission and publication. Most articles are reviewed within 4-6 weeks of submission and those accepted are published within a year of that decision.
期刊最新文献
As if I was a spacecraft returning to Earth's atmosphere. Expanding insights into illness narratives and childhood cancer through evocative autoethnography. The practice of information appraisal: An ethnographic study of a health information intervention. Is Covid-19 "vaccine uptake" in postsecondary education a "problem"? A critical policy inquiry. Visualising, navigating and making time: The use of a digital solution in treatment and rehabilitation from low back pain. Sensing pain: Embodied knowledge in endometriosis.
×
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