ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Developing a digital health competency assessment framework for public health services: a Delphi-AHP approach.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Building consensus on core teaching content of a digital public health curriculum: a Delphi study with public health experts in Germany.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Yushida: an IoT-based smart injection system for long-term management of chronic diseases.Frontiers in digital health · 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
Objective: To construct a scientifically validated and practical digital health competency assessment framework for public health services, addressing gaps in current evaluation paradigms that fail to comprehensively assess individuals' proactive engagement with digital health tools. Methods: The study employed a mixed-methods approach, beginning with a systematic literature review and structured interviews to draft an initial indicator system. Two rounds of Delphi consultations with 15 experts were conducted to refine the framework, followed by quantification of indicators using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Results: The final framework comprises 3 primary indicators (Health Literacy, Information Literacy, Digital Competency), 9 secondary indicators, and 19 tertiary indicators. Health Literacy and Information Literacy were weighted highest (0.4545 each), reflecting their foundational roles, while Digital Competency (0.0909) served as a complementary enabler. Conclusion: This study addresses a critical gap in digital health research by providing a multidimensional assessment tool that integrates technological, cognitive, and behavioral dimensions. The framework aligns with global digital health strategies and responds to societal challenges like the "digital divide." Its practical applications include guiding policy-making, optimizing digital health services, and tailoring health education programs to improve public health outcomes.
Indexed as
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.