Cited by 607Health disparities and outcomesPublic Health and Social InequalitiesHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A framework for digital health equity

Open access
Richardson, Safiya, Lawrence, Katharine, Schoenthaler, Antoinette M., Mann, Devin·2022·npj Digital Medicine

Abstract

We present a comprehensive Framework for Digital Health Equity, detailing key digital determinants of health (DDoH), to support the work of digital health tool creators in industry, health systems operations, and academia. The rapid digitization of healthcare may widen health disparities if solutions are not developed with these determinants in mind. Our framework builds on the leading health disparities framework, incorporating a digital environment domain. We examine DDoHs at the individual, interpersonal, community, and societal levels, discuss the importance of a root cause, multi-level approach, and offer a pragmatic case study that applies our framework.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41746-022-00663-0

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1 Framework for digital health equity. National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities Research Framework Expanded for Digital Health Equity.
Fig. 1 Framework for digital health equity. National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities Research Framework Expanded for Digital Health Equity.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 42 references

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Davis, F. Technology Acceptance Model For Empirically Testing New End-user Information Systems: Theory and Result. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. (1986).
  2. Caldwell, B. et al. Web content accessibility guidelines (WCAG) 2.0. WWW Consort. (W3C) 290, 1–34 (2008).
  3. White, M., Adams, J. & Heywood, P. How and why do interventions that increase health overall widen inequalities within populations. Soc. Inequal. Public Health 65, 82 (2009).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 607

Metadata

Authors
Richardson, S., Lawrence, K., Schoenthaler, A. M., & Mann, D.
Affiliations
New York University (US)
Corresponding author
Richardson, Safiya
Venue
npj Digital Medicine
Published
2022-08-18
Volume
5
Issue
1
Pages
119-119
ISSN
2398-6352 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4292202284
Cited by
607
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 193 · 2025: 183 · 2024: 149 · 2023: 71 · 2022: 9
FWCI
14.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • npj Digital Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (R01 HS026522)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (K23HL145114)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Health › Public Health and Social Inequalities
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
Keywords
digital health equity, digital determinants of health, health disparities, digital health tools, multilevel approach, root cause analysis, digital environment, health equity frameworks

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review