Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38951666›Full record

ReviewNPJ digital medicine2024

Recommendations to advance digital health equity: a systematic review of qualitative studies.

Sarah Wilson, Clare Tolley, Ríona Mc Ardle, Lauren Lawson, Emily Beswick, Nehal Hassan, Robert Slight, Sarah Slight

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in NPJ digital medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 79 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
79citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

79 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Perioperative Caregiver Education Using Animated Videos for Pediatric Tonsillectomy: A Randomized Controlled Study.Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
    Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

19 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

8 authors.

Sarah WilsonSchool of Pharmacy, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7803-3978
Clare TolleySchool of Pharmacy, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK.
Ríona Mc ArdleTranslational and Clinical Research Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK.
Lauren LawsonSchool of Pharmacy, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0433-5214
Emily BeswickTrinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Nehal HassanSchool of Pharmacy, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8302-5769
Robert SlightThe Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK.
Sarah SlightSchool of Pharmacy, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK. Sarah.Slight@newcastle.ac.uk.

Funding

DH | National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) NIHR205190DH | National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) NIHR 301677
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The World Health Organisation advocates Digital Health Technologies (DHTs) for advancing population health, yet concerns about inequitable outcomes persist. Differences in access and use of DHTs across different demographic groups can contribute to inequities. Academics and policy makers have acknowledged this issue and called for inclusive digital health strategies. This systematic review synthesizes literature on these strategies and assesses facilitators and barriers to their implementation. We searched four large databases for qualitative studies using terms relevant to digital technology, health inequities, and socio-demographic factors associated with digital exclusion summarised by the CLEARS framework (Culture, Limiting conditions, Education, Age, Residence, Socioeconomic status). Following the PRISMA guidelines, 10,401 articles were screened independently by two reviewers, with ten articles meeting our inclusion criteria. Strategies were grouped into either outreach programmes or co-design approaches. Narrative synthesis of these strategies highlighted three key themes: firstly, using user-friendly designs, which included software and website interfaces that were easy to navigate and compatible with existing devices, culturally appropriate content, and engaging features. Secondly, providing supportive infrastructure to users, which included devices, free connectivity, and non-digital options to help access healthcare. Thirdly, providing educational support from family, friends, or professionals to help individuals develop their digital literacy skills to support the use of DHTs. Recommendations for advancing digital health equity include adopting a collaborative working approach to meet users' needs, and using effective advertising to raise awareness of the available support. Further research is needed to assess the feasibility and impact of these recommendations in practice.

Identifiers

PMID38951666
PMCPMC11217442

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.