Community-Informed Mobile COVID-19 Testing Model to Addressing Health Inequities

Background: Rapid expansion of mobile technology has resulted in the development of many mobile health (“mHealth”) platforms for health monitoring and support. However, applicability, desirability, and extent of tailoring of these platforms for pregnant women, particularly in populations who experience the greatest health inequities—such as women with diabetes mellitus (DM) and/or those with greater socioeconomic barriers—remains unknown. The objective is to understand low-income pregnant women’s experiences and preferences for mHealth tools to support DM health and improve DM self-management during pregnancy. Methods: Low-income pregnant and postpartum women were included in individual interviews or focus groups; women with type 2 DM, gestational DM, or no DM were included. Analysis was performed with the constant comparison method. Results: In this population of 45 ( N=37 with DM) low-income, largely minority, pregnant and postpartum women, 100% reported access to smartphones and prior experience with apps. Interest in mHealth to support health and engagement during pregnancy was high. Preferences for general mHealth features included education that reduces uncertainty, support communities, visualizing progress, convenient access to information, and support for better management of pregnancy-related tasks. Preferred design elements included personalization, interactive features, and integrated graphics. Women with DM expressed multiple additional DM-specific needs, including support tools for DM self-management and self-regulation tasks. Conclusion: Pregnant and postpartum women, especially those with DM, desire mHealth technology to support engagement and to adapt lifestyle guidelines and treatment requirements for a healthy pregnancy. Further work to develop mHealth interventions tailored for target populations remains a key step in reducing health inequities and promoting access to evidence-based perinatal health interventions.

Download Full-text

Development of a checklist to guide equity considerations in health technology assessment

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care ◽

10.1017/s0266462320002275 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 37 ◽

Author(s):

Maria Benkhalti ◽

Manuel Espinoza ◽

Richard Cookson ◽

Vivian Welch ◽

Peter Tugwell ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Knowledge Translation ◽

Health Technology Assessment ◽

Priority Setting ◽

Technology Assessment ◽

Literature Search ◽

Health Inequities ◽

Health Technology ◽

Decision Makers ◽

Added Value ◽

Pilot Test

Abstract Objectives Health technology assessment (HTA) can impact health inequities by informing healthcare priority-setting decisions. This paper presents a novel checklist to guide HTA practitioners looking to include equity considerations in their work: the equity checklist for HTA (ECHTA). The list is pragmatically organized according to the generic HTA phases and can be consulted at each step. Methods A first set of items was based on the framework for equity in HTA developed by Culyer and Bombard. After rewording and reorganizing according to five HTA phases, they were complemented by elements emerging from a literature search. Consultations with method experts, decision makers, and stakeholders further refined the items. Further feedback was sought during a presentation of the tool at an international HTA conference. Lastly, the checklist was piloted through all five stages of an HTA. Results ECHTA proposes elements to be considered at each one of the five HTA phases: Scoping, Evaluation, Recommendations and Conclusions, Knowledge Translation and Implementation, and Reassessment. More than a simple checklist, the tool provides details and examples that guide the evaluators through an analysis in each phase. A pilot test is also presented, which demonstrates the ECHTA's usability and added value. Conclusions ECHTA provides guidance for HTA evaluators wishing to ensure that their conclusions do not contribute to inequalities in health. Several points to build upon the current checklist will be addressed by a working group of experts, and further feedback is welcome from evaluators who have used the tool.

Download Full-text