Digital health interventions for all? Examining inclusivity across all stages of the digital health intervention research process
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 30 January 2024
- journal article
- letter
- Published by Springer Nature in Trials
- Vol. 25 (1) , 1-8
Abstract
Digital interventions offer many possibilities for improving health, as remote interventions can enhance reach and access to underserved groups of society. However, research evaluating digital health interventions demonstrates that such technologies do not equally benefit all and that some in fact seem to reinforce a “digital health divide.” By better understanding these potential pitfalls, we may contribute to narrowing the digital divide in health promotion. The aim of this article is to highlight and reflect upon study design decisions that might unintentionally enhance inequities across key research stages—recruitment, enrollment, engagement, efficacy/effectiveness, and retention. To address the concerns highlighted, we propose strategies including (1) the standard definition of “effectiveness” should be revised to include a measure of inclusivity; (2) studies should report a broad range of potential inequity indicators of participants recruited, randomized, and retained and should conduct sensitivity analyses examining potential sociodemographic differences for both the effect and engagement of the digital interventions; (3) participants from historically marginalized groups should be involved in the design of study procedures, including those related to recruitment, consent, intervention implementation and engagement, assessment, and retention; (4) eligibility criteria should be minimized and carefully selected and the screening process should be streamlined; (5) preregistration of trials should include recruitment benchmarks for sample diversity and comprehensive lists of sociodemographic characteristics assessed; and (6) studies within trials should be embedded to systematically test recruitment and retention strategies to improve inclusivity. The implementation of these strategies would enhance the ability of digital health trials to recruit, randomize, engage, and retain a broader and more representative population in trials, ultimately minimizing the digital divide and broadly improving population health.Keywords
Funding Information
- Universität Bayreuth (Centre of International Excellence "Alexander von Humboldt")
This publication has 50 references indexed in Scilit:
- The effect of antihypertensive agents on sleep apnea: protocol for a randomized controlled trialTrials, 2014
- Patterns of success: Online self-monitoring in a web-based behavioral weight control program.Health Psychology, 2013
- Understanding attrition from international internet health interventions: a step towards global eHealthHealth Promotion International, 2012
- Impact and Costs of Incentives to Reduce Attrition in Online Trials: Two Randomized Controlled TrialsJournal of Medical Internet Research, 2011
- More than Tuskegee: Understanding Mistrust about Research ParticipationJournal Of Health Care For The Poor and Underserved, 2010
- European network for Health Technology Assessment, EUnetHTA: Planning, development, and implementation of a sustainable European network for Health Technology AssessmentInternational Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 2009
- Comparing Two Web-Based Smoking Cessation Programs: Randomized Controlled TrialJournal of Medical Internet Research, 2008
- Barriers to recruiting underrepresented populations to cancer clinical trials: A systematic reviewCancer, 2007
- The Law of AttritionJournal of Medical Internet Research, 2005
- What can be done about inequalities in health?The Lancet, 1991