The DOI matches its Crossref record; 147 of the 147 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Challenges in the development of digital public health interventions and mapped solutions: Findings from a scoping review
Open accessAbstract
Background: “Digital public health” has emerged from an interest in integrating digital technologies into public health. However, significant challenges which limit the scale and extent of this digital integration in various public health domains have been described. We summarized the literature about these challenges and identified strategies to overcome them. Methods: We adopted Arksey and O’Malley's framework (2005) integrating adaptations by Levac et al. (2010). OVID Medline, Embase, Google Scholar, and 14 government and intergovernmental agency websites were searched using terms related to “digital” and “public health.” We included conceptual and explicit descriptions of digital technologies in public health published in English between 2000 and June 2020. We excluded primary research articles about digital health interventions. Data were extracted using a codebook created using the European Public Health Association's conceptual framework for digital public health. Results and analysis: Overall, 163 publications were included from 6953 retrieved articles with the majority (64%, n = 105) published between 2015 and June 2020. Nontechnical challenges to digital integration in public health concerned ethics, policy and governance, health equity, resource gaps, and quality of evidence. Technical challenges included fragmented and unsustainable systems, lack of clear standards, unreliability of available data, infrastructure gaps, and workforce capacity gaps. Identified strategies included securing political commitment, intersectoral collaboration, economic investments, standardized ethical, legal, and regulatory frameworks, adaptive research and evaluation, health workforce capacity building, and transparent communication and public engagement. Conclusion: Developing and implementing digital public health interventions requires efforts that leverage identified strategies to overcome diverse challenges encountered in integrating digital technologies in public health.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
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?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The sustainability of digital health interventions, particularly with limited public health funding, remains challenging [141,142].”
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
Using thematic analysis in psychology
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006) · Qualitative Research in Psychology · doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa · Cited by 194,414
PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation
Tricco, A. C., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O'Brien, K. K., Colquhoun, H., Levac, D., Moher, D., Peters, M. D. J., Horsley, T., Weeks, L., et al. (2018) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/m18-0850 · Cited by 43,565 · cited 1×
“Our reports adhere to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) for scoping reviews.(13) Data sources”
MethodScoping studies: towards a methodological framework
Arksey, H., & O'Malley, L. (2005) · International Journal of Social Research Methodology · doi:10.1080/1364557032000119616 · Cited by 36,742 · cited 1×
“We followed Arksey and O ’ Malley ’ s framework for scoping reviews, 11 with adaptations suggested by Levac et al.. 12 Our reports adhere to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) for scoping reviews.”
MethodScoping studies: advancing the methodology
Levac, D., Colquhoun, H., & O'Brien, K. K. (2010) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-5-69 · Cited by 15,268 · cited 1×
“We followed Arksey and O’Malley’s framework for scoping reviews,(11) with adaptations suggested by Levac et al..(12) Our reports adhere to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) for scoping reviews.”
MethodUnderstanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda
Vial, G. (2019) · The Journal of Strategic Information Systems · doi:10.1016/j.jsis.2019.01.003 · Cited by 7,337 · cited 1×
“9 However, public health action requires wide-ranging public engagement, a population health perspective, and prompt information exchange and cooperation across diverse organizations and public health agencies.”
BackgroundMoorhead, S. A., Hazlett, D. E., Harrison, L., Carroll, J. K., Irwin, A., & Hoving, C. (2013) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.1933 · Cited by 2,517
Deep Learning for Health Informatics
Ravì, D., Wong, C., Deligianni, F., Berthelot, M., Andreu-Perez, J., Lo, B., & Yang, G.-Z. (2017) · IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics · doi:10.1109/jbhi.2016.2636665 · Cited by 2,000 · cited 3×
“24,39,40 43 Health equity.”
BackgroundEysenbach, G. (2009) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.1157 · Cited by 1,351 · cited 2×
“52,154 There is an ethical imperative to implement such strategies as misinfor-mation and disinformation ampli fi ed through digital technology has signi fi cant public health consequences.”
BackgroundDigital technologies in the public-health response to COVID-19
Budd, J., Miller, B. S., Manning, E. M., Lampos, V., Zhuang, M., Edelstein, M., Rees, G., Emery, V. C., Stevens, M. M., Keegan, N., et al. (2020) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-020-1011-4 · Cited by 1,195 · cited 1×
“163,164 However, we remain con fi - dent that the broad challenges and strategies identi fi ed in this review remain relevant in our current context.”
BackgroundArtificial intelligence and the future of global health
Schwalbe, N., & Wahl, B. (2020) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(20)30226-9 · Cited by 956 · cited 7×
“Further, the iterative and fast-paced evolution of digital technologies is not matched by current research methods which are often rigid and slow to adapt.(27,36,43,45,77,82,83,88,89) There is also a lack of widely agreed-upon standards for assessing outcomes(55,90) and reliable outcome measures that extend beyond use…”
BackgroundInfluential
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 22
- World Health Organization (WHO), 2020, Draft global strategy on digital health 2020–2024
- Public Health England, 2017, Digital-first public health: public health England’s digital strategy
- Canadian Public Health Association, The Canadian Public Health Association, Canadian Public Health Association, 2017, Public health: a conceptual framework
- Veritas Health Innovation. Covidence systematic review software, www.covidence.org.
- Deny S, The Health Foundation
- Kreps GL, 2017, Stud Health Technol Inform, 240, 347
- Murray E, 2012, Med 20, 1, e3
- Norman CD, 2012, Stud Health Technol Inform, 172, 54
- EXPH, Report on Assessing the impact of digital transformation of health services, expert panel on effective ways of investing in health (EXPH)
- Fountain JE, 2004, Prev Chronic Dis, 1, 1
- Heldman MPH AB, 2013, Public Health Rev, 35, 1
- Savel TG, 2012, MMWR Surveill Summ, 61, 20
- UNICEF Health Section Implementation Research and Delivery Science Unit and the Office of Innovation Global Innovation Centre, 2018, UNICEF’s approach to digital health
- Canadian Institutes for Health Research, 2019, AI For public health equity: workshop report
- Kostkova P, Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on World Wide Web - WWW ‘13 Companion, 687
- Topol, E, 2019, The topol review. Preparing the healthcare workforce to deliver the digital future. An independent report on behalf of the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care
- UNFPA, World Health Organization (WHO), Accelerator discussion paper 6: data and digital health
- Rachadell JJ, 2020, Digital health in 2019. A summary report of the track of digital health at the 12th European Public Health conference 2019 in Marseille
- World Health Organization (WHO), 2018, Digital technologies: shaping the future of primary health care
- World Health Organization (WHO), 2018, Towards a roadmap for the digitalization of national health systems in Europe
- European Commission, Communication from the commission: guidance on apps supporting the fight against COVID-19 pandemic in relation to data protection 2020/C 124 I/01
- European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies & Hamilton, Clayton, Eurohealth, 25
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–117 of 117
Chan, D. W. K., Leong, K., Ong, C., Ku, C. W., Chan, J. K. Y., Chua, M. C., Yap, F. K. P., & Loy, S. L. (2025) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2025-101684
Iyamu, I. O., Gorun, P., Bartlett, S. R., McKee, G. R., Donelle, L., Chang, H.-J., Sierra-Rosales, R., Haag, D., Pedersen, H., Lachowsky, N. J., et al. (2025) · Sexually Transmitted Infections · doi:10.1136/sextrans-2025-056638
“23 However, individuals with higher Resource Appraisal skills, particularly individuals with recent risky sexual exposure, may assess GetCheckedOnline as misaligned with their needs, given its focus on asymptomatic testing.”
Self-citationEnhancing Research Productivity and Faculty Development
Bou, D., Orn, V., Loem, S., & Lang, B. (2025) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-3291-8.ch003
Brubacher, L. J., Omenka, C. O., Beggs, B., Bustos, M., Heitkamp, P., Morita, P. P., & Dodd, W. (2026) · Digital Health · doi:10.1177/20552076251410991
“18,90,91 The Digital Infrastructure domain highlighted critical technology-related factors.”
Hayudini, M. A., Jimpoy, A. J. A., Alibasa, J. T., Carolino, A. A., Julkamri, J., Muhadja, N., Aming, A. R. H., Pangandaman, H. K., & Escorial, J. E. A. A. (2026) · Jurnal Keperawatan Indonesia · doi:10.7454/jki.v29i1.1781
“Weak infrastructure can compromise data security, while poor staff training increases the risk of ethical lapses such as mishandled records or inadequate consent processes (Iyamu et al., 2022).”
Campoamor, N. B., Mittman, B. G., Moss, S. R., Rothberg, M. B., & Bridges, J. F. P. (2026) · American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs · doi:10.1007/s40256-026-00799-4
Evaluation of a Partial Ban on Rx‐Rebates in Germany
Gail, M. M., Götz, G., Herold, D., & Schäfer, J. T. (2026) · Health Economics · doi:10.1002/hec.70112
“…and Smith 2000; Brown and Goolsbee 2002; Sinai and Waldfogel 2004; Jin and Kato 2007; Goldmanis et al. 2010; Cavallo 2017; Couture et al. 2021) and “digital public health”, which explores how digitization can improve population health (Iyamu et al. 2022; Wong et al. 2022; Yurkovich et al. 2024).”
Haddiya, I., & Ramdani, S. (2026) · Green energy and technology · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-99001-4_32
Agrawal, A., Kumar, P., Sindhuja, S., Reddy, K. S. S., Somesula, S., Nagaraj, D. S., & Gupta, D. (2026) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/979-8-2600-2468-3.ch001
Designing interdisciplinary education in digital public health: a position paper
Attard, C., Silva, A. M., Ahmed, S., Wong, B. L. H., Sultana, R., Albanese, E., & Tartari, E. (2026) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2026.1866630 · Cited by 2
“Fragmented systems, poor interoperability, and infrastructure deficits undermine DiPH integration, compounded by nontechnical barriers including ethical concerns, policy gaps, and resource constraints that disproportionately burden vulnerable populations and exacerbate digital divides (30–32).”
Armeni, E., Barac, U., Kaur, E., & Kempegowda, P. (2026) · Frontiers in Digital Health · doi:10.3389/fdgth.2026.1813555
Zhang, A., Matson, T. E., Barrett, T. D., Kepner, W. E., & Glass, J. E. (2026) · doi:10.2196/preprints.106668
AI-Driven Monitoring of Environmental Contaminants
Izah, S. C., Kari, A., Alum, E. U., Raimi, M. O., & Uppin, C. V. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-9033-8.ch008
Pan, Q., & Liu, N. (2026) · International Journal of Public Health · doi:10.3389/ijph.2026.1610073
User-centered service design approach for self-care using earable devices
Choi, J.-Y., Lee, S., Park, J., Ha, J., Lee, T., Kim, J., Cho, S., & Jeon, G. (2026) · Digital Health · doi:10.1177/20552076261478392
Nishan, M. N. H. (2026) · Journal of Public Health Research · doi:10.1177/22799036261500249 · Cited by 1
Ghosh, O., & Kumar, B. (2026) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-9094-9.ch002
Metadata
- Authors
- Iyamu, I., Gómez-Ramírez, O., Xu, A. X., Chang, H.-J., Watt, S., Mckee, G., & Gilbert, M.
- Affiliations
- University of British Columbia (CA)
- BC Centre for Disease Control (CA)
- British Columbia Centre for Disease Control, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Corresponding author
- Gilbert, Mark
- Venue
- DIGITAL HEALTH
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2022-01
- Volume
- 8
- Pages
- 205520762211022
- ISSN
- 2055-2076 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC9152201
- OpenAlex
- W4282924562
- Cited by
- 118
- References
- 147
- Citations by year
- 2026: 23 · 2025: 45 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 1
- FWCI
- 4.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Digital Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Foundation for Population and Public Health at the British Columbia Center for Disease Control
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Public Health Policies and Education
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Healthcare Systems and Practices
- Keywords
- digital public health, digital health interventions, implementation barriers, health equity, health policy, data infrastructure, workforce capacity, intersectoral collaboration, political commitment, citizen participation, digital integration
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
