ReviewInternational journal for equity in health2026
Digital exclusion in healthcare services: a scoping review.
Review in International journal for equity in health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- ASSeTS: a systematic review and development of the World Health Organization's classification system for social isolation and loneliness interventions.Population health metrics · 2026Pooled it
- Adaptation of Social Health Care Tools From Paper-Based to Web-Based Formats: Scoping Review.Online journal of public health informatics · 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
backgroundWith the widespread adoption of digital technologies in healthcare, digital exclusion-the phenomenon in which individuals are excluded from digital technologies due to a lack of access, skills, motivation, and other factors-has emerged as a significant contributor to health inequities. However, conceptual ambiguity, inconsistent measurement approaches, and an unclear impact on health outcomes within healthcare settings limit the development of effective strategies to address digital exclusion. This scoping review aims to clarify the concept and dimensions of digital exclusion in healthcare, examine its measurement methods, and understand its effects on health.
methodsA scoping review was conducted following the PRISMA-ScR guidelines for reporting. A systematic search was performed in PubMed, CINAHL, Emerald, Web of Science Core Collection, PsycINFO, Ovid, Embase, IEEE Xplore, and Google Scholar for English-language literature published up to December 1, 2024. Two independent reviewers performed screening and data extraction, and findings were synthesized narratively using thematic analysis.
resultThe initial search retrieved 3,392 studies. A total of 39 studies were finally included. The concept of digital exclusion can be categorized into three levels focusing on access, user capabilities, and meaningful outcomes. Thematic analysis identified five core dimensions: affordability barriers, technical resource barriers, digital competence, psychological barriers, and usage and support barriers. Nineteen assessment tools were identified, including 16 individual-level and 3 population-level instruments. However, most lacked validation and were not designed specifically for healthcare contexts. Evidence indicates that digital exclusion is associated with various adverse health outcomes, including restricted access to medical resources, psychosocial problems, cognitive and functional decline, and increased disease risk and poorer prognosis.
conclusionDigital exclusion in healthcare is a multidimensional, complex phenomenon with significant negative impacts on health. Future research should deepen conceptual understanding within healthcare contexts, develop validated clinical assessment tools, and investigate mechanisms through which digital exclusion affects a broad range of health outcomes, thereby promoting equitable access to digital health services.
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.