Engagement With Digital Health Technologies Among Older People Living in Socially Deprived Areas: Qualitative Study of Influencing Factors
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: The potential benefits of incorporating digital technologies into health care are well documented. For example, they can improve access for patients living in remote or underresourced locations. However, despite often having the greatest health needs, people who are older or living in more socially deprived areas may be less likely to have access to these technologies and often lack the skills to use them. This puts them at risk of experiencing further health inequities. In addition, we know that digital health inequities associated with older age may be compounded by lower socioeconomic status. Yet, there is limited research on the intersectional barriers and facilitators for engagement with digital health technology by older people who are particularly marginalized. Objective: This study aimed to explore factors influencing engagement with digital health technologies among people at the intersection of being older and socially deprived. Methods: We conducted semistructured interviews with people who were 70 years or older, living in a socially deprived area, or both. Chronic kidney disease was our clinical context. We thematically analyzed interview transcripts using the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology as a theoretical framework. Results: We interviewed 26 people. The majority were White British (n=20) and had moderate health and digital literacy levels (n=10 and n=11, respectively). A total of 13 participants were 70 years of age or older and living in a socially deprived area. Across participants, we identified 2 main themes from the interview data. The first showed that some individuals did not use digital health technologies due to a lack of engagement with digital technology in general. The second theme indicated that people felt that digital health technologies were "not for them." We identified the following key engagement factors, with the first 2 particularly impacting participants who were both older and socially deprived: lack of opportunities in the workplace to become digitally proficient; lack of appropriate support from family and friends; negative perceptions of age-related social norms about technology use; and reduced intrinsic motivation to engage with digital health technology because of a perceived lack of relevant benefits. Participants on the intersection of older age and social deprivation also felt significant anxiety around using digital technology and reported a sense of distrust toward digital health care. Conclusions: We identified factors that may have a more pronounced negative impact on the health equity of older people living in socially deprived areas compared with their counterparts who only have one of these characteristics. Successful implementation of digital health interventions therefore warrants dedicated strategies for managing the digital health equity impact on this group. Future studies should further develop these strategies and investigate their effectiveness, as well as explore the influence of related characteristics, such as educational attainment and ethnicity.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».