Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37401631›Full record

ArticleJournal of primary care & community health

Opportunities and Challenges to Advance Health Equity Using Digital Health Tools in Underserved Communities in Southeast US: A Mixed Methods Study.

Mitchell A Blount, Megan D Douglas, Chaohua Li, Denita T Walston, Phoebe L Nelms, Carmen L Hughes, Anne H Gaglioti, Dominic H Mack

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of primary care & community health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
9.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mitchell A BlountNational Center for Primary Care, Morehouse School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4808-8331
Megan D DouglasNational Center for Primary Care, Morehouse School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Chaohua LiNational Center for Primary Care, Morehouse School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Denita T WalstonNational Center for Primary Care, Morehouse School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Phoebe L NelmsNational Center for Primary Care, Morehouse School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Carmen L HughesNational Center for Primary Care, Morehouse School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Anne H GagliotiNational Center for Primary Care, Morehouse School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5843-8476
Dominic H MackNational Center for Primary Care, Morehouse School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Morehouse School of Medicine · USMetroHealth · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionOver the last 30 years, the adoption of health information technology and digital health tools (DHTs) into the US health system has been instrumental to improving access to care, especially for people living in rural, underserved, and underrepresented communities. Despite widespread adoption of DHTs by primary care clinicians, documented challenges have contributed to inequitable use and benefit. The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated rapid adoption of DHTs, accelerated by state and federal policy changes, in order to meet patient needs and ensure access to care.

methodsThe Digital Health Tools Study employed a mixed methods approach to assess adoption and use of DHTs by primary care clinicians in southeastern states and identify individual- and practice-level barriers and facilitators to DHT implementation. A survey was conducted using a multi-modal recruitment strategy: newsletters, meeting/conference presentations, social media, and emails/calls. Focus groups were conducted to assess priorities, barriers, and facilitators and were recorded/transcribed verbatim. Descriptive statistics were calculated for survey results, produced for the whole sample, and stratified by state. Thematic analysis was conducted of focus group transcripts.

resultsThere were 1215 survey respondents. About 55 participants who had missing demographic information were excluded from the analysis. About 99% of clinicians used DHTs in the last 5 years, modalities included: telehealth (66%), electronic health records (EHRs; 66%), patient portals (49%), health information exchange (HIE; 41%), prescription drug monitoring programs (39%), remote/home monitoring (27%), and wearable devices (22%). Time (53%) and cost (51%) were identified as barriers. About 61% and 75% of clinicians reported being "satisfied" to "very satisfied" with telemedicine and EHRs, respectively. Seven focus groups with 25 clinicians were conducted and indicated COVID-19 and the use of supplemental tools/apps to connect patients to resources as major motivators for adopting DHTs. Challenges included incomplete and difficult-to-utilize HIE interfaces for providers and internet/broadband access and poor connectivity for patients.

conclusionsThis study describes the impact adopting DHTs by primary care clinicians has on expanded access to healthcare and reducing health disparities in regions with longstanding health and social inequities. The findings identify opportunities to leverage DHTs to advance health equity and highlight opportunities for policy improvement.

Indexed as

COVID-19Health EquityHealth Information ExchangeHumansPandemicsSoutheastern United StatesCOVID-19digital toolshealth equityhealth technologyprimary care

Identifiers

PMID37401631
PMCPMC10331080
OpenAlexW4383058291

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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 Socratic graph.