eHealth and the Digital Divide Among Older Canadians: Insights from a National Cross-Sectional Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The multi-disciplinary life course theory emphasizes the relation between a person's choices and their socio-economic context and their capacity to make decisions within existing opportunities/constraints. Older age is particularly characterized by social and environmental conditions that may impact people's use of technology and eHealth applications. OBJECTIVE: This research aims to present an overview of eHealth applications use among older Canadian adults and examine the relationship between eHealth use and social and health system interaction determinants. METHODS: We conducted a national cross-sectional survey of older adults (n=2000) in Canada assessing their technology (e.g., tablets, computers etc.) and eHealth applications (e.g., fall detection and telemonitoring technologies, Internet etc.) use, social determinants (e.g., socio-demographic characteristics, environmental living conditions) and health system interaction (e.g., health status, access to care, and services utilization). RESULTS: There is technological readiness (85% owned computers, 74% used Internet daily/weekly) among older Canadian adults, although it does not translate into eHealth applications use. Internet use to connect with health care professionals, access results/patient portals, or book medical appointment was limited. The use of telemonitoring, and fall detection technologies was low (around 9%, and 4%, respectively). There were significant variations in eHealth use highlighting the importance of accounting for social determinants and interactions with the healthcare system. 12.7% of the variance in online access to laboratory results was explained by the province of residence (higher in Ontario and British Columbia), living environment (lower in rural settings), and access/need variables (higher for those with private insurance and willingness to pay for quicker access, and hospitalized). Women reported more Internet use for self-diagnosis and looking for online information. Individuals with excellent perceived health, and those with no recent emergency visits or home care services (OR=2.16 and 3.427, CI=[1.23-3.80] and [1.55-7.60]), showed greater use of mApps for health and FDT, respectively. A digital divide exists within the older adults population that raises concerns about whether those with higher needs and limited resources have access to and can benefit from eHealth applications. CONCLUSIONS: Addressing the digital health gap among older adults is not simply a matter of technological access but of health equity and system sustainability. Without deliberate policies, digital health risks reinforcing existing disparities by disproportionately excluding those with the greatest health needs and the fewest resources. Our findings identify the groups most at risk of digital exclusion, such as rural residents, institutionalized older adults, and those with limited financial or insurance coverage, and point to where interventions can yield the greatest benefit.
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 | 0,008 | 0,013 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| 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 ».