Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
J Med Internet Res ; 23(6): e29395, 2021 06 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34106074


BACKGROUND: In 2020, the number of internet users surpassed 4.6 billion. Individuals who create and share digital data can leave a trail of information about their habits and preferences that collectively generate a digital footprint. Studies have shown that digital footprints can reveal important information regarding an individual's health status, ranging from diet and exercise to depression. Uses of digital applications have accelerated during the COVID-19 pandemic where public health organizations have utilized technology to reduce the burden of transmission, ultimately leading to policy discussions about digital health privacy. Though US consumers report feeling concerned about the way their personal data is used, they continue to use digital technologies. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to understand the extent to which consumers recognize possible health applications of their digital data and identify their most salient concerns around digital health privacy. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with a diverse national sample of US adults from November 2018 to January 2019. Participants were recruited from the Ipsos KnowledgePanel, a nationally representative panel. Participants were asked to reflect on their own use of digital technology, rate various sources of digital information, and consider several hypothetical scenarios with varying sources and health-related applications of personal digital information. RESULTS: The final cohort included a diverse national sample of 45 US consumers. Participants were generally unaware what consumer digital data might reveal about their health. They also revealed limited knowledge of current data collection and aggregation practices. When responding to specific scenarios with health-related applications of data, they had difficulty weighing the benefits and harms but expressed a desire for privacy protection. They saw benefits in using digital data to improve health, but wanted limits to health programs' use of consumer digital data. CONCLUSIONS: Current privacy restrictions on health-related data are premised on the notion that these data are derived only from medical encounters. Given that an increasing amount of health-related data is derived from digital footprints in consumer settings, our findings suggest the need for greater transparency of data collection and uses, and broader health privacy protections.

Comportamento do Consumidor/estatística & dados numéricos , Informação de Saúde ao Consumidor/estatística & dados numéricos , Coleta de Dados/ética , Conjuntos de Dados como Assunto/provisão & distribuição , Entrevistas como Assunto , Privacidade/psicologia , Pesquisa Qualitativa , Adolescente , Adulto , Estudos de Coortes , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estados Unidos , Adulto Jovem
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(5): e2110918, 2021 05 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34009347


Importance: Curbing COVID-19 transmission is currently the greatest global public health challenge. Consumer digital tools used to collect data, such as the Apple-Google digital contact tracing program, offer opportunities to reduce COVID-19 transmission but introduce privacy concerns. Objective: To assess uses of consumer digital information for COVID-19 control that US adults find acceptable and the factors associated with higher or lower approval of use of this information. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional survey study obtained data from a nationally representative sample of 6284 US adults recruited by email from the web-based Ipsos KnowledgePanel in July 2020. Respondents evaluated scenarios reflecting uses of digital data for COVID-19 control (case identification, digital contact tracing, policy setting, and enforcement of quarantines). Main Outcomes and Measures: Levels of support for use of personal digital data in 9 scenarios to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 infection, rated on a Likert scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Multivariable linear regression models were fitted for each scenario and included factors hypothesized to be associated with views about digital data use for COVID-19 mitigation measures. Black and Hispanic survey respondents were oversampled; thus, poststratification weights were used so that results are representative of the general US population. Results: Of 6284 individuals invited to participate in the study, 3547 responded, for a completion rate of 56%. A total of 1762 participants (52%) were female, 715 (21%) identified as Black, 790 (23%) identified as Hispanic, and 1224 (36%) were 60 years or older; mean (SD) age was 51.7 (16.6) years. Approval of scenarios was low, ranging from 28% to 43% (52%-67% when neutral responses were included). Differences were found based on digital data source (smartphone vs social media: coefficient, 0.29 [95% CI, 0.23-0.35]; P < .001; smart thermometer vs social media: coefficient, 0.09 [95% CI, 0.03-0.16]; P = .004). County COVID-19 rates (coefficient, -0.02; 95% CI, -0.16 to 0.13 for quartile 4 compared with quartile 1) and prior family diagnosis of COVID-19 (coefficient, 0.00; 95% CI, -0.25 to 0.25) were not associated with support. Compared with self-described liberal individuals, conservative (coefficient, -0.81; 95% CI, -0.96 to -0.66; P < .001) and moderate (coefficient, -0.52; 95% CI, -0.67 to -0.38; P < .001) individuals were less likely to support the scenarios. Similarly, large political differences were observed in support of the Apple-Google digital contact tracing program, with less support from conservative (coefficient, -0.99; 95% CI, -1.11 to -0.87; P < .001) and moderate (coefficient, -0.59; 95% CI, -0.69 to -0.48; P < .001) individuals compared with liberal individuals. Respondents from racial/ethnic minority groups were more supportive of the scenarios than were White, non-Hispanic respondents. For example, compared with White respondents, Black respondents were more supportive of the Apple-Google contact tracing program (coefficient, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.07-0.32; P = .002). Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study of US adults, many were averse to their information being used on digital platforms to mitigate transmission of COVID-19. These findings suggest that in current and future pandemics, public health departments should use multiple strategies to gain public trust and accelerate adoption of tools such as digital contact tracing applications.

Atitude , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Busca de Comunicante , Tecnologia Digital , Pandemias , Privacidade , Opinião Pública , Adulto , Idoso , Atitude/etnologia , Controle de Doenças Transmissíveis/métodos , Estudos Transversais , Coleta de Dados , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Grupos Minoritários , Política , SARS-CoV-2 , Smartphone , Mídias Sociais , Inquéritos e Questionários , Telemedicina , Estados Unidos
Am J Health Promot ; 35(2): 250-254, 2021 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32662281


PURPOSE: To evaluate an overdose response training program in public libraries. DESIGN: Mixed methods evaluation including pre- and post-intervention questionnaires and debriefing interviews. SETTING: Ten Philadelphia public libraries. SAMPLE: Overdose response training participants (library staff and community members). INTERVENTION: Public, hour-long overdose response trainings run by the Philadelphia Department of Public Health, the Free Library of Philadelphia, and the University of Pennsylvania between March and December 2018. MEASURES: Questionnaires assessed motivation for attending trainings, overdose response readiness, and intention to acquire and carry naloxone. Debriefing interviews elicited training feedback. ANALYSIS: We assessed changes in overdose response readiness and intention to carry naloxone and performed thematic analysis on interview data. RESULTS: At 29 trainings, 254 people attended, of whom 203 (80%) completed questionnaires and 23 were interviewed. 30% of participants had witnessed an overdose, but only 3% carried naloxone at baseline. Following training, overdose response readiness and intention to acquire/carry naloxone improved significantly (P < .01). Interviewees nonetheless noted that they experienced barriers to naloxone acquisition, including cost, stigma, and concern regarding future insurability. Trainings subsequently included naloxone distribution. Interviewees reported that public libraries were welcoming, nonstigmatizing venues. CONCLUSION: In Philadelphia, library-based overdose response trainings were well-attended and reached a population with prior overdose encounters. Similar trainings could be deployed as a scalable overdose prevention strategy in the nation's 16 568 public libraries.

Subst Abus ; 41(4): 468-474, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32213045


BACKGROUND: In the context of the opioid overdose crisis, local health departments are on the front lines, coordinating programs and services and translating state and federal policies into community action. While media reports describe growth of Overdose Education and Naloxone Distribution (OEND) programs among local health departments, little is known about program features, scope, and target populations. Methods: We surveyed health departments in 180 United States counties with high overdose mortality rates. Results: Among health officials from 54 counties (30% response), many counties reported implementation of evidence-based practices, with a high degree of programmatic variation. The majority of responding health departments (94%) conducted overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) programs. Programs were heterogeneous in scale, with a reported median of 250 naloxone kits (range 1-25,000 kits) acquired for community distribution. In addition, four in five respondents were aware of their state's standing order policy for increasing naloxone access. While the majority of respondents reported county-level availability of at least one form of evidence-based medications to treat opioid use disorder (MOUD), many reported no availability of buprenorphine (33%) or methadone (43%). Conclusions: Local health departments are vital to reducing opioid overdose mortality, and many are implementing relevant evidence-based practices. To support further adoption of potentially life-saving strategies, health departments need adequate funding and staffing as well as policies and guidelines to support implementation.