MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4232746645 · doi:10.2196/preprints.30399

Defining Digital Public Health and the Role of Digitization, Digitalization, and Digital Transformation: Scoping Review (Preprint)

2021· preprint· en· W4232746645 on OpenAlexaff
Ihoghosa Iyamu, Alice X T Xu, Oralia Gómez-Ramírez, Aidan Ablona, Hsiu-Ju Chang, Geoffrey McKee, Mark Gilbert

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsBC Centre for Disease ControlHIV Legal NetworkUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDigitizationDigital healthPublic healthPublic relationsDigital transformationPolitical scienceThematic analysisMedicineSociologyComputer scienceWorld Wide WebSocial scienceQualitative researchHealth careNursingTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND The recent proliferation and application of digital technologies in public health has spurred interest in digital public health. However, as yet, there appears to be a lack of conceptual clarity and consensus on its definition. OBJECTIVE In this scoping review, we seek to assess formal and informal definitions of digital public health in the literature and to understand how these definitions have been conceptualized in relation to digitization, digitalization, and digital transformation. METHODS We conducted a scoping literature search in Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Google Scholar, and 14 government and intergovernmental agency websites encompassing 6 geographic regions. Among a total of 409 full articles identified, we reviewed 11 publications that either formally defined digital public health or informally described the integration of digital technologies into public health in relation to digitization, digitalization, and digital transformation, and we conducted a thematic analysis of the identified definitions. RESULTS Two explicit definitions of digital public health were identified, each with divergent meanings. The first definition suggested digital public health was a reimagination of public health using new ways of working, blending established public health wisdom with new digital concepts and tools. The second definition highlighted digital public health as an asset to achieve existing public health goals. In relation to public health, digitization was used to refer to the technical process of converting analog records to digital data, digitalization referred to the integration of digital technologies into public health operations, and digital transformation was used to describe a cultural shift that pervasively integrates digital technologies and reorganizes services on the basis of the health needs of the public. CONCLUSIONS The definition of digital public health remains contested in the literature. Public health researchers and practitioners need to clarify these conceptual definitions to harness opportunities to integrate digital technologies into public health in a way that maximizes their potential to improve public health outcomes. CLINICALTRIAL INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT RR2-10.2196/preprints.27686

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.031
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.129
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.163

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0310.129
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0250.034
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0130.013
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.346 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMobile Health and mHealth Applications→French-language works237,207→