ArticleBMJ open2024
Advancing health equity and the role of digital health technologies: a scoping review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Advancing equity and value in United States healthcare: an umbrella review.International journal for equity in health · 2026Pooled it
- Digital health interventions for promoting adults lifestyle behaviors: who is being left behind? An evidence synthesis of social inequality.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2026Pooled it
- AI-Augmented Teach-Back in Dentistry: From Patient Education to Verified Clinical Understanding.Cureus · 2026Review
- Assessing existing infection prevention and control measures used by nurses in water-scarce healthcare in a global setting: A scoping review.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2026Article
- China's new quality productive forces in healthcare: spatial disparities, dynamic evolution, and convergence.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Digital health literacy and immigrants' access to digitalized healthcare: a comparative study of Spain, and Sweden - implications for public health policy.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Inequity in Access to and Use of Digital Health Technologies in Routine Heart Failure Care: Protocol for a Scoping Review.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Technology Access, Digital Literacy, and Enrollment Support Preferences in a Federally Qualified Health Center: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Reimagining paediatric care: technology, trust, and the global movement for child-centred innovation.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Equity by design principles for digital health interventions.International journal for equity in health · 2025Article
- Advancing health equity and the role of digital health technologies: a scoping review.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Exploring gender equality in digital health: A qualitative study of community-dwelling older Chinese women.Digital healthArticle
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHealthcare systems around the world exhibit inherent systemic inequities that disproportionately impact marginalised populations. Digital health technologies (DHTs) hold promising potential to address these inequities and to play a pivotal role in advancing health equity. However, there is a notable gap regarding a comprehensive and structured overview of existing frameworks and guidelines on advancing health equity and a clear understanding of the potential of DHTs in their implementation. To this end, our primary objectives are first to identify prevalent frameworks and guidelines that promote health equity and second to pinpoint the contemporary role of DHTs as an avenue for implementing these frameworks and guidelines. This synthesis will guide future DHTs, ensuring equitable accessibility and effectiveness and ultimately contributing to enhancing health equity among marginalised populations. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This work adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Scoping Reviews. To identify pertinent evidence, we will employ seven electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science and WISO) encompassing the fields of medicine, healthcare and social sciences. Moreover, selected grey literature will be considered. We will include primary and secondary studies published in English between 2010 and 2023 that focus on (technology and non-technology-based) frameworks and guidelines for health equity improvement. Each article will undergo an independent assessment for eligibility, followed by the extraction of pertinent data from eligible sources. Subsequently, the extracted data will be subjected to qualitative and quantitative analyses, and findings will be presented using narrative and descriptive formats. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is deemed unnecessary for this scoping review, as it involves synthesising existing knowledge. The findings from this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/94pht.
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.