The Sociodemographic Digital Divide in Mobile Health App Use Among Clients at Outpatient Departments in Inner Mongolia, China: Cross-sectional Survey Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mobile health (mHealth) apps have become part of the infrastructure for access to health care in hospitals, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, little is known about the effects of sociodemographic characteristics on the digital divide regarding the use of hospital-based mHealth apps and their benefits to patients and caregivers. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to document the cascade of potential influences from digital access to digital use and then to mHealth use, as well as the potential influence of sociodemographic variables on elements of the cascade. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted from January to February 2021 among adult clients at outpatient departments in 12 tertiary hospitals of Inner Mongolia, China. Structural equation modeling was conducted after the construct comprising digital access, digital use, and mHealth use was validated. RESULTS: Of 2115 participants, the β coefficients (95% CI) of potential influence of digital access on digital use, and potential influence of digital use on mHealth use, were 0.28 (95% CI 0.22-0.34) and 0.51 (95% CI 0.38-0.64), respectively. Older adults were disadvantaged with regard to mHealth access and use (β=-0.38 and β=-0.41), as were less educated subgroups (β=-0.24 and β=-0.27), and these two factors had nonsignificant direct effects on mHealth use. CONCLUSIONS: To overcome the mHealth use divide, it is important to improve digital access and digital use among older adults and less educated groups.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".