PubMed چکیده/رکورد

Identifying Subgroups in Acceptance and Intended Use of Digital Technologies and the Role of Economic, Cultural, Social, and Person Capital: Latent Class Analysis.

استودیوی صوتی مقاله

پخش حرفه‌ای فارسی و انگلیسی

در حال بررسی نسخه‌های صوتی ذخیره‌شده…

صوت تولیدشده با هوش مصنوعی است. برای کاربرد علمی یا درمانی، متن و منبع اصلی را بررسی کنید.
خواندن هوشمند فارسی و انگلیسی در حال آماده‌سازی صداهای مرورگر…
تنظیم صدای طبیعی و سرعت

صداهایی که در نامشان «Natural»، «Neural» یا «Online» دیده می‌شود معمولاً طبیعی‌ترند. انتخاب صدا به صداهای نصب‌شده در ویندوز و مرورگر شما بستگی دارد.

چکیده اصلی

BACKGROUND: Digital health technologies offer promising opportunities to support physical health. However, their acceptance, use, and associated benefits are not equally distributed across society. While existing research has mainly focused on traditional socioeconomic indicators, broader sociological influences, including economic, cultural, social, and person capital, may provide a more comprehensive understanding of these inequalities. Yet, too little is currently known about how different subgroups, based on their economic, cultural, social, and person capital, relate to intentions to accept and use digital health technologies. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed (1) to identify distinct subgroups of individuals based on their acceptance and intended use of digital technologies to support their physical health and (2) to examine how these subgroups differ in terms of economic, cultural, social, and person capital. METHODS: We used cross-sectional data from the Longitudinal Internet Studies for the Social Sciences (LISS) panel, including data from the LISS Core Study on health, economic situation, and social integration and leisure. To supplement these data, we conducted an additional online survey in November 2023 via the LISS panel to assess participants' acceptance and intended use of digital technologies to support their physical health. The final sample included 1096 participants. We applied 3-step latent class analysis to identify subgroups based on constructs from the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. Post hoc comparisons were used to characterize the subgroups based on 22 indicators of economic, cultural, social, and person capital. RESULTS: Five subgroups were identified: neutral users (480/1096, 43.8%), uninterested users (235/1096, 21.4%), engaged users (226/1096, 20.6%), resistant users (102/1096, 9.3%), and enthusiastic users (53/1096, 4.8%). The largest group, neutral users, neither fully adopted nor rejected digital technologies to support their physical health. Higher levels of economic, cultural, and social capital were generally associated with greater acceptance and intended use of digital health technologies. However, person capital showed a different pattern: neutral users reported low self-confidence despite moderate use, while resistant users reported high self-image despite low acceptance and intended use. This suggests that person capital relates to the acceptance and intended use of digital health technologies in a different way than economic, cultural, and social capital. CONCLUSIONS: Inequalities in digital health engagement extend beyond socioeconomic factors and reflect broader differences in economic, cultural, social, and person capital. The distinct user types that were identified reveal that combinations of different types of capital can influence acceptance and intended use in unexpected ways. Addressing these multidimensional disparities is crucial for designing targeted and equitable strategies to enhance digital health participation across diverse populations.

متن کامل اصلی

متن در JumpToDate ذخیره نشده است.

برای بررسی دسترسی کتابخانه‌ای یا خرید، رکورد اصلی را باز کنید.

رفتن به منبع اصلی

کلیدواژه‌ها

digital dividedigital healthdigital technologysocial inequalitysocioeconomic factors
در همین زیرشاخه

مقاله‌های مرتبط

PubMed2027

Towards a justice-based reimagination of digital health research and innovation: actionable considerations for learning health systems.

The need to embed decolonising methodologies in health-care practice has been recognised globally. The term decolonising health, which has become a topic of increasing public and academic discourse since 2021, refers to the dismantling of colonial systems of dominance and oppression ingrained within health systems and structures. Despite the growing recognition of the need for decolonisation in broader health research and practice, the…

PubMed2026

[THE TRANSFORMATION OF LABOR ACTIVITY OF MEDICAL WORKERS IN CONDITIONS OF DIGITIZATION OF HEALTH CARE].

The implementation of digital technologies in the work of both health care professionals and the industry as a whole is a key factor in improving health care efficiency. The digitization of the Russian health care is implemented in accordance with the strategy of digital transformation. The digital transformations not only condition changes in the existing organization of functioning of medical institutions but also cardinal transforma…

PubMed2026

Moving beyond sexual and reproductive health knowledge: an evaluation of a co-designed digital engagement tool to promote sexual and reproductive health among international students in New South Wales, Australia.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluates the perceived impact and needed enhancement of a co-designed digital sexual and reproductive health (SRH) tool ('the Hub') developed to address SRH literacy gaps among international students (IS) in New South Wales, Australia. Despite Australia's large IS population and recognition of SRH as a fundamental human right, many report limited exposure to SRH information and face barriers to navigating health…

PubMed2026

PrEP awareness, barriers and facilitators in Malaysia in the current landscape of new HIV infections: a review.

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) uptake remains low among key populations in Malaysia despite notable improvements in PrEP awareness. This literature review aims to understand PrEP awareness, barriers and facilitators that influence PrEP utilisation. PrEP awareness ranged between 20 and 85%, whereas uptake ranged between 8 and 18.3%. Reported barriers included cost, limited accessibility, poor PrEP literacy, potential side-effects, dail…