ReviewFrontiers in sociology2024
Alignment and specifics of Brazilian health agencies in relation to the international premises for the implementation of digital health in primary health care: a rhetorical analysis.
Review in Frontiers in sociology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Digital Health and Primary Health Care Quality: A Survey Case Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Impact of digital health on the quality of primary care for people with chronic noncommunicable diseases: A scoping review protocol.PloS one · 2025Article
- Preparation and validation of the instrument "QualiAPS digital-Brazil" for assessing digital health care in primary health care: a required tool.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Digital health and sustainable development goals have had strong impacts with the COVID-19 pandemic. In Brazil, the health crisis scenario required changes in social welfare programs and policies, based on recommendations from international agencies, such as the UN and WHO. This study aims to analyze the alignment of the arguments of Brazilian and international organizations for the adoption of digital health in Primary Health Care based on the COVID-19 pandemic. This is a qualitative documentary study of the rhetorical analysis type, based on Perelman and Obrechts-Tyteca's Theory of Argumentation. The search for documents was carried out by two independent researchers, between December 2021 and June 2022, through the websites of the World Health Organization, the Pan American Health Organization, the Brazilian Ministry of Health, and the Federal Councils of Medicine and Brazilian nursing, with the terms "digital health," "telehealth," "telemedicine," "e-health," "telehealth," "telenursing," "telemedicine," and "digital health." Twenty official documents were analyzed and identified in terms of context, authorship, authenticity, reliability, nature, and key concepts. The international and Brazilian arguments emphasize the applicability of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) in the health field. In logical arguments, based on the structure of reality, international agencies emphasize the overlap between health needs and the conditions for the applicability of ICTs. In Brazil, however, there was a need to regulate the digital practices of health professionals. In the international discourse, in the structuring of reality, there are illustrations of the relationship between the context of the health crisis caused by COVID-19 and the concrete conditions for the applicability of digital health; while in the Brazilian discourse, the need to strengthen an environment conducive to digital health is explicit. The Brazilian alignment in relation to the international premises is evident. Yet, there is a need, socially and economically sustainable, to strengthen the inclusion of digital health in PHC policy.
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.