How Participatory Health Informatics Catalyzes One Digital Health.

OBJECTIVE: To identify links between Participatory Health Informatics (PHI) and the One Digital Health framework (ODH) and to show how PHI could be used as a catalyst or contributor to ODH. METHODS: We have analyzed the addressed topics within the ODH framework in previous IMIA Yearbook contributions from our working group during the last 10 years. We have matched main themes with the ODH's framework three perspectives (individual health and wellbeing, population and society, and ecosystem). RESULTS: PHI catalysts ODH individual health and wellbeing perspective by providing a more comprehensive view on human health, attitudes, and relations between human health and animal health. Integration of specific behavior change techniques or gamification strategies in digital solutions are effective to change behaviors which address the P5 paradigm. PHI supports the population and society perspective through the engagement of the various stakeholders in healthcare. At the same time, PHI might increase a risk for health inequities due to technologies inaccessible to all equally and challenges associated with this. PHI is a catalyst for the ecosystem perspective by contributing data into the digital health data ecosystem allowing for analysis of interrelations between the various data which in turn might provide links among all components of the healthcare ecosystem. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that PHI can and will involve topics relating to ODH. As the ODH concept crystalizes and becomes increasingly influential, its themes will permeate and become embedded in PHI even more. We look forward to these developments and co-evolution of the two frameworks.

The lived experience of people with disabilities during the COVID-19 pandemic on Twitter: Content analysis.

Objective: People with disabilities (PWDs) are at greater risk of COVID-19 infection, complications, and death, and experience more difficulty accessing care. We analyzed Twitter tweets to identify important topics and investigate health policies' effects on PWDs. Methods: Twitter's application programming interface was used to access its public COVID-19 stream. English-language tweets from January 2020 to January 2022 containing a combination of keywords related to COVID-19, disability, discrimination, and inequity were collected and refined to exclude duplicates, replies, and retweets. The remaining tweets were analyzed for user demographics, content, and long-term availability. Results: The collection yielded 94,814 tweets from 43,296 accounts. During the observation period, 1068 (2.5%) accounts were suspended and 1088 (2.5%) accounts were deleted. Account suspension and deletion among verified users tweeting about COVID-19 and disability were 0.13% and 0.3%, respectively. Emotions were similar among active, suspended, and deleted users, with general negative and positive emotions most common followed by sadness, trust, anticipation, and anger. The overall average sentiment for the tweets was negative. Ten of the 12 topics identified (96.8%) related to pandemic effects on PWDs; "politics that rejects and leaves the disabled, elderly, and children behind" (48.3%) and "efforts to support PWDs in the COVID crisis" (31.8%) were most common. The sample of tweets by organizations (43.9%) was higher for this topic than for other COVID-19-related topics the authors have investigated. Conclusions: The primary discussion addressed how pandemic politics and policies disadvantage PWDs, older adults, and children, and secondarily expressed support for these populations. The increased level of Twitter use by organizations suggests a higher level of organization and advocacy within the disability community than in other groups. Twitter may facilitate recognition of increased harm to or discrimination against specific populations such as people living with disability during national health events.

Social Media, Digital Health Literacy, and Digital Ethics in the Light of Health Equity.

OBJECTIVE: Social media is used in the context of healthcare, for example in interventions for promoting health. Since social media are easily accessible they have potential to promote health equity. This paper studies relevant factors impacting on health equity considered in social media interventions. METHODS: We searched for literature to identify potential relevant factors impacting on health equity considered in social media interventions. We included studies that reported examples of health interventions using social media, focused on health equity, and analyzed health equity factors of social media. We identified Information about health equity factors and targeted groups. RESULTS: We found 17 relevant articles. Factors impacting on health equity reported in the included papers were extracted and grouped into three categories: digital health literacy, digital ethics, and acceptability. CONCLUSIONS: Literature shows that it is likely that digital technologies will increase health inequities associated with increased age, lower level of educational attainment, and lower socio-economic status. To address this challenge development of social media interventions should consider participatory design principles, visualization, and theories of social sciences.

Interventions for Increasing Digital Equity and Access (IDEA) among rural patients who smoke: Study protocol for a pragmatic randomized pilot trial.

BACKGROUND: Cigarette smoking prevalence is higher among rural compared with urban adults, yet access to cessation programming is reduced. The Increasing Digital Equity and Access (IDEA) study aims to evaluate three digital access and literacy interventions for promoting engagement with an online evidence-based smoking cessation treatment (EBCT) program among rural adults. METHODS: The pilot trial will use a pragmatic, three-arm, randomized, parallel-group design with participants recruited from a Midwest community-based health system in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Iowa. All participants will receive an online, 12-week, EBCT program, and written materials on digital access resources. Participants will be stratified based on state of residence and randomly assigned with 1:1:1 allocation to one of three study groups: (1) Control Condition-no additional study intervention (n = 30); (2) Loaner Digital Device-Bluetooth enabled iPad with data plan coverage loaned for the study duration (n = 30); (3) Loaner Digital Device + Coaching Support-loaner device plus up to six, 15-20 min motivational interviewing-based coaching calls to enhance participants' digital access and literacy (n = 30). All participants will complete study assessments at baseline and 4- and 12-weeks post-randomization. Outcomes are cessation program and trial engagement, biochemically confirmed smoking abstinence, and patient experience. RESULTS: A rural community advisory committee was formed that fostered co-design of the study protocol for relevance to rural populations, including the trial design and interventions. CONCLUSION: Study findings, processes, and resources may have relevance to other health systems aiming to foster digital inclusion in smoking cessation and chronic disease management programs and clinical trials in rural communities.

Digital health & low-value care.

Digital health advances offer a multitude of possibilities to improve public health and individual wellbeing. Little attention has been paid, however, to digital health's potential to create low-value care - the reduction of which is increasingly appreciated as a policy priority. This commentary provides a framework to illustrate the potential for consumer-facing digital health to generate three distinct categories of low-value care; 1) ineffective care because it is underdeveloped, 2) inefficient care because it supplements rather than substitutes, or 3) unwanted care because it is not aligned with clinician and patient preferences. We offer specific policy recommendations to reduce each type of low-value care.

Recommendations for the safe, effective use of adaptive CDS in the US healthcare system: an AMIA position paper.

The development and implementation of clinical decision support (CDS) that trains itself and adapts its algorithms based on new data-here referred to as Adaptive CDS-present unique challenges and considerations. Although Adaptive CDS represents an expected progression from earlier work, the activities needed to appropriately manage and support the establishment and evolution of Adaptive CDS require new, coordinated initiatives and oversight that do not currently exist. In this AMIA position paper, the authors describe current and emerging challenges to the safe use of Adaptive CDS and lay out recommendations for the effective management and monitoring of Adaptive CDS.

Health 'Big Data' Value, Benefit, and Control: The Patient eHealth Equity Gap.

Improvements in artificial intelligence and machine learning combined with the availability and exponential growth in individual and population health data offer opportunities for innovative patient/citizen-centered eHealth solutions. However, this confluence of social, technical, and economic interests can result in the privatization of control of patient data and contribute to widening inequity in access to healthcare. This paper explores these issues and advocates for a more equitable approach to advances in health big data for patients and citizens.

Ethical Considerations for Participatory Health through Social Media: Healthcare Workforce and Policy Maker Perspectives.

OBJECTIVES: To identify the different ethical issues that should be considered in participatory health through social media from different stakeholder perspectives (i.e., patients/service users, health professionals, health information technology (If) professionals, and policy makers) in any healthcare context. METHODS: We implemented a two-round survey composed of open ended questions in the first round, aggregated into a list of ethical issues rated for importance by participants in the second round, to generate a ranked list of possible ethical issues in participatory health based on healthcare professionals' and policy makers' opinions on both their own point of view and their beliefs for other stakeholders' perspectives. RESULTS: Twenty-six individuals responded in the first round of the survey. Multiple ethical issues were identified for each perspective. Data privacy, data security, and digital literacy were common themes in all perspectives. Thirty-three individuals completed the second round of the survey. Data privacy and data security were ranked among the three most important ethical issues in all perspectives. Quality assurance was the most important issue from the healthcare professionals' perspective and the second most important issue from the patients' perspective. Data privacy was the most important consideration for patients/service users. Digital literacy was ranked as the fourth most important issue, except for policy makers' perspective. CONCLUSIONS: Different stakeholders' opinions fairly agreed that there are common ethical issues that should be considered across the four groups (patients, healthcare professionals, health IT professionals, policy makers) such as data privacy, security, and quality assurance.

Balancing Between Privacy and Patient Needs for Health Information in the Age of Participatory Health and Social Media: A Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVES: With the increased use of participatory health enabling technologies, such as social media, balancing the need for health information with patient privacy and confidentiality has become a more complex and immediate concern. The purpose of this paper produced by the members of the IMIA Participatory Health and Social Media (PHSM) working group is to investigate patient needs for health information using participatory health enabling technologies, while balancing their needs for privacy and confidentiality. METHODS: Six domain areas including media sharing platforms, patient portals, web-based platforms, crowdsourcing websites, medical avatars, and other mobile health technologies were identified by five members of the IMIA PHSM working group as relevant to participatory health and the balance between data sharing and patient needs for privacy and confidentiality. After identifying the relevant domain areas, our scoping review began by searching several databases such as PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Google Scholar using a variety of key search terms. RESULTS: A total of 1,973 studies were identified, of which 68 studies met our inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Results showed that challenges for balancing patient needs for information and privacy and confidentiality concerns included: cross-cultural understanding, clinician and patient awareness, de-identification of data, and commercialization of patient data. Some opportunities identified were patient empowerment, connecting participatory health enabling technologies with clinical records, open data sharing agreement, and e-consent. CONCLUSION: Balancing between privacy and patient needs for health information in the age of participatory health and social media offers several opportunities and challenges. More people are engaging in actively managing health through participatory health enabling technologies. Such activity often includes sharing health information and with this comes a perennial tension between balancing individual needs and the desire to uphold privacy and confidentiality. We recommend that guidelines for both patients and clinicians, in terms of their use of participatory health-enabling technologies, are developed to ensure that patient privacy and confidentiality are protected, and a maximum benefit can be realized.

Sorrell v. IMS Health: issues and opportunities for informaticians.

In 2011, the US Supreme Court decided Sorrell v. IMS Health, Inc., a case that addressed the mining of large aggregated databases and the sale of prescriber data for marketing prescription drugs. The court struck down a Vermont law that required data mining companies to obtain permission from individual providers before selling prescription records that included identifiable physician prescription information to pharmaceutical companies for drug marketing. The decision was based on constitutional free speech protections rather than data sharing considerations. Sorrell illustrates challenges at the intersection of biomedical informatics, public health, constitutional liberties, and ethics. As states, courts, regulatory agencies, and federal bodies respond to Sorrell, informaticians' expertise can contribute to more informed, ethical, and appropriate policies.