[Social inequality in the context of digital health applications: digital divides in access, use, effectiveness, and privacy]. / Soziale Ungleichheit im Zusammenhang mit digitalen Gesundheitsanwendungen: Digitale Spaltungen in den Bereichen Zugang, Nutzung, Wirksamkeit und Privatsphäre.

Given the massive increase in digital health tools, the question about the impact of these tools on health equity has gained importance. The aim of this narrative review is to discuss the extent and central aspects of the digital divide. To illustrate the extent of the digital divide, we draw on data from the Liter@te study, which interviewed low-literacy individuals regarding their use of digital health tools and their digital health literacy. The results of the Liter@te study are compared with population surveys conducted in parallel. Four areas can be distinguished in relation to digital divides: access, use, effectiveness, and privacy. Inequalities can be observed in all four areas. While differences in access or material infrastructure, as well as in usage patterns and the required literacies, have already been investigated in some studies, the data basis for a comprehensive assessment of the unequal effects of digital health tools in different population groups is still lacking. Digital divides in the area of privacy protection is an emerging field. However, transparent and understandable privacy measures will undoubtedly be an important prerequisite for the widespread use of digital health tools. Overall, in addition to a better data base, involvement of disadvantaged population groups in the development of digital health interventions is necessary.

Reducing intervention- and research-induced inequalities to tackle the digital divide in health promotion.

Social inequalities are an important contributor to the global burden of disease within and between countries. Using digital technology in health promotion and healthcare is seen by some as a potential lever to reduce these inequalities; however, research suggests that digital technology risks re-enacting or evening widening disparities. Most research on this digital health divide focuses on a small number of social inequality indicators and stems from Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic (WEIRD) countries. There is a need for systematic, international, and interdisciplinary contextualized research on the impact of social inequality indicators in digital health as well as the underlying mechanisms of this digital divide across the globe to reduce health disparities. In June 2023, eighteen multi-disciplinary researchers representing thirteen countries from six continents came together to discuss current issues in the field of digital health promotion and healthcare contributing to the digital divide. Ways that current practices in research contribute to the digital health divide were explored, including intervention development, testing, and implementation. Based on the dialogue, we provide suggestions for overcoming barriers and improving practices across disciplines, countries, and sectors. The research community must actively advocate for system-level changes regarding policy and research to reduce the digital divide and so improve digital health for all.

How to select interventions for promoting physical activity in schools? Combining preferences of stakeholders and scientists.

BACKGROUND: The failure to scale-up and implement physical activity (PA) interventions in real world contexts, which were previously successful under controlled conditions, may be attributed to the different criteria of stakeholders and scientists in the selection process of available interventions. Therefore, the aim of our study was to investigate and compare the criteria applied by local stakeholders and scientists for selecting amongst suitable school-based PA interventions for implementation. METHODS: We conducted a three-round repeated survey Delphi study with local stakeholders (n = 7; Bremen, Germany) and international scientific PA experts (n = 6). Independently for both panels, two rounds were utilized to develop a list of criteria and the definitions of criteria, followed by a prioritization of the criteria in the third round. For each panel, a narrative analysis was used to rank-order unique criteria, list the number of scorers for the unique criteria and synthesize criteria into overarching categories. RESULTS: The stakeholders developed a list of 53 unique criteria, synthesized into 11 categories with top-ranked criteria being 'free of costs', 'longevity' and 'integration into everyday school life'. The scientists listed 35 unique criteria, synthesized into 7 categories with the top-ranked criteria being 'efficacy', 'potential for reach' and 'feasibility'. The top ranked unique criteria in the stakeholder panel were distributed over many categories, whereas four out of the top six criteria in the scientist panel were related to 'evidence'. CONCLUSIONS: Although stakeholders and scientists identified similar criteria, major differences were disclosed in the prioritization of the criteria. We recommend an early collaboration of stakeholders and scientists in the design, implementation, and evaluation of PA interventions.

Is the uptake, engagement, and effectiveness of exclusively mobile interventions for the promotion of weight-related behaviors equal for all? A systematic review.

Mobile health interventions are promising behavior change tools. However, there is a concern that they may benefit some populations less than others and thus widen inequalities in health. This systematic review investigated differences in uptake of, engagement with, and effectiveness of mobile interventions for weight-related behaviors (i.e., diet, physical activity, and sedentary behavior) based on a range of inequality indicators including age, gender, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. The protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020192473). Six databases (CINAHL, EMBASE, ProQuest, PsycINFO, Pubmed, and Web of Science) were searched from inception to July 2021. Publications were eligible for inclusion if they reported the results of an exclusively mobile intervention and examined outcomes by at least one inequality indicator. Sixteen publications reporting on 13 studies were included with most reporting on multiple behaviors and inequality indicators. Uptake was investigated in one study with no differences reported by the inequality indicators studied. Studies investigating engagement (n = 7) reported differences by age (n = 1), gender (n = 3), ethnicity (n = 2), and education (n = 2), while those investigating effectiveness (n = 9) reported differences by age (n = 3), gender (n = 5), education (n = 2), occupation (n = 1), and geographical location (n = 1). Given the limited number of studies and their inconsistent findings, evidence of the presence of a digital divide in mobile interventions targeting weight-related behaviors is inconclusive. Therefore, we recommend that inequality indicators are specifically addressed, analyzed, and reported when evaluating mobile interventions.

Worsened Financial Situation During the COVID-19 Pandemic Was Associated With Depressive Symptomatology Among University Students in Germany: Results of the COVID-19 International Student Well-Being Study.

Background: Previous findings suggest that university students are at an elevated risk to experience financial hardship and to suffer from depressive symptoms. This vulnerability may have substantially increased during the coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic which might have affected students' socio-economic situation but possibly also their mental well-being. We examined whether the financial situation changed during the COVID-19 pandemic among German university students, and whether changes were associated with mental well-being. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey in May and July 2020 at five German universities. Participants were asked, if they had sufficient financial resources to cover monthly expenses before and during the pandemic. The answer options were dichotomized into worsened and no change/better financial situation compared to before the COVID-19 pandemic. Depressive symptoms were assessed using the CES-D 8 scale. For examining associations between sociodemographic, study-related, and financial factors and "worsened financial situation," we ran a generalized linear mixed model. To assess associations between depressive symptoms and worsened financial situation, we performed a linear mixed model. Results: We included 7,199 participants in the analyses (69% female, 30% male, 1% diverse, mean age: 24 years, standard deviation: 4.7). Overall, 25% of the participants reported to have a worsened financial situation at the time of the survey than in the time before COVID-19. Factors associated with a worsened financial situation were migration background, parents not being academics, not being able to borrow money, and payment of tuition fee by student and loan [odds ratios (OR) ranging from 1.20 to 2.35]. Factors associated with lower odds were: being single, living with others, studying a health-related field, being enrolled in a doctoral/Ph.D. or state exam program, and publicly funded tuition/tuition paid with a scholarship (OR ranging from 0.42 to 0.80). A worsened financial situation was associated with 1.02 points more on the CES-D 8 scale (95% CI: 0.80-1.24). Conclusion: Our results suggest that the pandemic put a number of students under financial strain with detrimental consequences for their mental well-being. Renewed attention must be paid to this vulnerable group to prevent the potentially damaging effects on their mental health.