ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Digital Divide: Contrasting Provider and User Insights on Healthcare Services During the COVID-19 Pandemic.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Effect of Continuous Nursing Based on IKAP Theory on Periodontal Indicators and Self-Management Ability of Patients With Periodontal Disease.International dental journal · 2026Review
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
introductionThis prospective descriptive study explored the disparities in perceptions and experiences regarding healthcare services between providers and users during the COVID-19 pandemic, with a specific focus on the impact of the digital divide on access to and quality of care. The study revealed significant inconsistencies in the experiences of healthcare providers and patients, particularly regarding the effectiveness of digital health interventions.
methodsThis study was a prospective descriptive analysis conducted to evaluate and compare the use of electronic healthcare services between healthcare employees (HΕs) (N = 290) and consumers (Cs) (N = 263) from December 2024 to May 2025, utilizing an electronic survey after the COVID-19 pandemic. To ensure the statistical validity of the sample size, a power analysis was performed using G*Power 3.1.9.2 software. A questionnaire was developed to evaluate the readiness of healthcare employees and consumers for electronic healthcare services. It was validated to ensure reliability within this population and comprised 49 questions.
resultsThe response rate of the participants was 89.19%, and the Cronbach's alpha for the questionnaire was 0.738. The study revealed notable differences in perceptions regarding health-related information and digital health technologies across genders and age groups. Specifically, 28.8% of females and 27.3% of males considered it important to be well-informed about health issues (χ
conclusionsThis research contributes to filling a gap in comparative analyses of provider and user perspectives, offering a comprehensive view of how digital health was adopted and experienced during a global crisis. Practically, it provides an evidence base to guide future interventions aimed at fostering more equitable, resilient, and user-friendly digital healthcare systems.
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.