ArticleCancer medicine2023
The digital divide: Racial disparities in adoption and utilization of health information technology among patients with lymphoid cancers.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Geographical Disparities in Accessing and Utilizing Digital Health and Strategies to Mitigate These Disparities: A Literature Review.Health science reports · 2026Article
- The Development and Progress of Health Information Technology in Iran.Health science reports · 2025Article
- Characterizing the Adoption and Experiences of Users of Artificial Intelligence-Generated Health Information in the United States: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- The digital divide: Racial disparities in adoption and utilization of health information technology among patients with lymphoid cancers.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHealth information technology (HIT) has the potential to improve healthcare delivery and engagement. Studying racial-ethnic disparities in HIT engagement will help understand and overcome challenges to healthcare utilization.
methodsWe undertook a patient-reported survey among patients with lymphoid malignancies at two campuses of Mayo Clinic, Florida to explore HIT-related disparities. Variables between Whites and non-Whites, and non-Whites from the two campuses were compared.
resultsThe survey was completed by 1004 respondents, with 71% whites, 27% non-Whites (race-ethnicity not reported by 2%). Non-Whites included 30% responders at the main campus and 64% at an inner-city campus. Whites were significantly older and had higher education, while non-Whites had lesser access to a computer. Only 51% of non-Whites were registered to use electronic medical records (EMR) as compared to 72% Whites (p < 0.001) and significantly lesser number of non-Whites even knew that EMR existed (81% vs. 92%, p < 0.001). Encouragingly, a higher number of non-Whites wanted to engage in EMR. Non-Whites from the main campus were older, more educated and had more access to a computer as compared to those from the inner-city campus. Similar disparate factors were noted among minorities from the two campuses, suggesting impact of socioeconomic backgrounds on EMR usage among non-Whites. Linguistic barriers were more striking among inner-city campus non-Whites.
conclusionsNon-Whites continue to struggle with suboptimal utilization of the healthcare system and barriers related to integration in HIT, including disparities representing socioeconomic differences. Efforts need to be made at several levels to help racial-ethnic minorities overcome awareness, access, and linguistic barriers to HIT utilization.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.