Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31919531›Full record

ReviewBundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz2020

[Digital public health-an overview].

Hajo Zeeb, Iris Pigeot, Benjamin Schüz, Leibniz-WissenschaftsCampus Digital Public Health Bremen

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Digitization in Everyday Nursing Care: A Vignette Study in German Hospitals.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Hajo ZeebLeibniz WissenschaftsCampus Digital Public Health Bremen, Bremen, Deutschland. zeeb@leibniz-bips.de.
Iris PigeotLeibniz WissenschaftsCampus Digital Public Health Bremen, Bremen, Deutschland.
Benjamin SchüzLeibniz WissenschaftsCampus Digital Public Health Bremen, Bremen, Deutschland.
Leibniz-WissenschaftsCampus Digital Public Health Bremen

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The rapid development and proliferation of digital health technologies have not only changed the medical professions, but offer great potential for public health, particularly in health promotion and disease prevention.At the same time, this emerging field is also characterized by conceptual and terminological fuzziness, a marked lack of high-quality evidence, and an absence of an honest discussion of unintended consequences and side effects. Further challenges for digital public health lie in the fact that the development of new health technologies is mainly driven by technological progress and less by evidence-based needs and research in public health.In this overview paper, we aim at conceptually denoting the field of digital public health, using principal public health functions as guiding principles. We discuss some current applications of digital health technologies in fulfilling public health functions and propose a needs-based development of digital health technologies.We will further address specific challenges to digital public health, in particular socio-economic differences in the usage of and profiting from digital health technologies, data protection and privacy issues, as well as ethical issues.

Indexed as

Public HealthTelemedicineDelivery of Health CareGermanyHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansData protectionDigitizationE‑HealthInequityM‑Health

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.