ReviewNPJ digital medicine2025
Applying the principle of justice in digital health.
Review in NPJ digital medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bias and Fairness Across the Healthcare AI Lifecycle: A Clinician-Oriented Review.Balkan medical journal · 2026Review
- Beyond technology usefulness: Health system reliability, and socio-demographic and professional factors as shapers of technostress in physicians.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- MS360°: a conceptual digital-first, data-driven hybrid care framework for personalised multiple sclerosis management.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Review
- Digital health equity among older adult(s): a conceptual analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
- Evaluating Generative AI Psychotherapy Chatbots Used by Youth: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR mental health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In an increasingly digital healthcare landscape, it is essential to assess the ethical impact of technology on care practices. We present a conceptual framework on equity in digital health, addressing justice-related concepts and challenges to reducing the digital divide. An ethical approach ensures that digital health respects fundamental rights. We propose goals-such as incorporating digital determinants into public health policy-to promote justice and reduce health inequalities in digital health implementation.
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.