Approaches to priority identification in digital health in ten countries of the Global Digital Health Partnership – ScienceOpen
14
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Approaches to priority identification in digital health in ten countries of the Global Digital Health Partnership

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          To promote shared digital health best practices in a global context, as agreed within the Global Digital Health Partnership (GDHP), one of the most important topics to evaluate is the ability to detect what participating countries believe to be priorities suitable to improve their healthcare systems. No previously published scientific papers investigated these aspects as a cross-country comparison.

          Objective

          The aim of this paper is to present results concerning the priorities identification section of the Evidence and Evaluation survey addressed to GDHP members in 2021, comparing countries’ initiatives and perspectives for the future of digital health based on internationally agreed developments.

          Methods

          This survey followed a cross-sectional study approach. An online survey was addressed to the stakeholders of 29 major countries.

          Results

          Ten out of 29 countries answered the survey. The mean global score of 3.54 out of 5, calculated on the whole data set, demonstrates how the global attention to a digital evolution in health is shared by most of the evaluated countries.

          Conclusion

          The resulting insights on the differences between digital health priority identification among different GDHP countries serves as a starting point to coordinate further progress on digital health worldwide and foster evidence-based collaboration.

          Related collections

          Most cited references28

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A checklist for health research priority setting: nine common themes of good practice

          Health research priority setting processes assist researchers and policymakers in effectively targeting research that has the greatest potential public health benefit. Many different approaches to health research prioritization exist, but there is no agreement on what might constitute best practice. Moreover, because of the many different contexts for which priorities can be set, attempting to produce one best practice is in fact not appropriate, as the optimal approach varies per exercise. Therefore, following a literature review and an analysis of health research priority setting exercises that were organized or coordinated by the World Health Organization since 2005, we propose a checklist for health research priority setting that allows for informed choices on different approaches and outlines nine common themes of good practice. It is intended to provide generic assistance for planning health research prioritization processes. The checklist explains what needs to be clarified in order to establish the context for which priorities are set; it reviews available approaches to health research priority setting; it offers discussions on stakeholder participation and information gathering; it sets out options for use of criteria and different methods for deciding upon priorities; and it emphasizes the importance of well-planned implementation, evaluation and transparency.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Attitudes, acceptance and hesitancy among the general population worldwide to receive the COVID-19 vaccines and their contributing factors: A systematic review

            Background High rates of vaccination worldwide are required to establish a herd immunity and stop the current COVID-19 pandemic evolution. Vaccine hesitancy is a major barrier in achieving herd immunity across different populations. This study sought to conduct a systematic review of the current literature regarding attitudes and hesitancy to receiving COVID-19 vaccination worldwide. Methods A systematic literature search of PubMed and Web of Science was performed on July 5th, 2021, using developed keywords. Inclusion criteria required the study to (1) be conducted in English; (2) investigate attitudes, hesitancy, and/or barriers to COVID-19 vaccine acceptability among a given population; (3) utilize validated measurement techniques; (4) have the full text paper available and be peer-reviewed prior to final publication. Findings Following PRISMA guidelines, 209 studies were included. The Newcastle Ottawa (NOS) scale for cross-sectional studies was used to assess the quality of the studies. Overall, vaccine acceptance rates ranged considerably between countries and between different time points, with Arabian countries showing the highest hesitancy rates compared with other parts of the world. Interpretation A variety of different factors contributed to increased hesitancy, including having negative perception of vaccine efficacy, safety, convenience, and price. Some of the consistent socio-demographic groups that were identified to be associated with increased hesitancy included: women, younger participants, and people who were less educated, had lower income, had no insurance, living in a rural area, and self-identified as a racial/ethnic minority.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Digital health is a cultural transformation of traditional healthcare

              Under the term "digital health", advanced medical technologies, disruptive innovations and digital communication have gradually become inseparable from providing best practice healthcare. While the cost of treating chronic conditions is increasing and doctor shortages are imminent worldwide, the needed transformation in the structure of healthcare and medicine fails to catch up with the rapid progress of the medical technology industry. This transition is slowed down by strict regulations; the reluctance of stakeholders in healthcare to change; and ignoring the importance of cultural changes and the human factor in an increasingly technological world. With access and adoption of technology getting higher, the risk of patients primarily turning to an accessible, but unregulated technological solution for their health problem is likely to increase. In this paper, we discuss how the old paradigm of the paternalistic model of medicine is transforming into an equal level partnership between patients and professionals and how it is aided and augmented by disruptive technologies. We attempt to define what digital health means and how it affects the status quo of care and also the study design in implementing technological innovations into the practice of medicine.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Digit Health
                Front Digit Health
                Front. Digit. Health
                Frontiers in Digital Health
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                2673-253X
                16 September 2022
                2022
                : 4
                : 968953
                Affiliations
                Department of Life Sciences and Public Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore , Roma, Italy
                Author notes

                Edited by: Alessandro Blasimme, ETH Zürich, Switzerland

                Reviewed by: Elettra Ronchi, WHO Regional Office for Europe, Denmark Suptendra Nath Sarbadhikari, Independent researcher, India

                [* ] Correspondence: Gerardo Altamura gerardoaltamura@ 123456outlook.it

                Specialty Section: This article was submitted to Health Technology Implementation, a section of the journal Frontiers in Digital Health

                Article
                10.3389/fdgth.2022.968953
                9632991
                36339514
                ea7497f5-a5c0-42e9-a592-b1038b671e63
                © 2022 Cascini, Altamura, Failla, Gentili, Puleo, Melnyk, Causio and Ricciardi.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 14 June 2022
                : 22 August 2022
                Page count
                Figures: 6, Tables: 3, Equations: 0, References: 47, Pages: 0, Words: 0
                Categories
                Digital Health
                Original Research

                digital health,gdhp,priorities identification,interoperability,cross-countries

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content61

                Cited by5

                Most referenced authors254