• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

利用信息学让弱势群体参与研究:从 COVID-19 大流行中吸取的经验教训。

Using Informatics to Engage Vulnerable Populations in Research: Lessons Learned from the COVID-19 Pandemic.

机构信息

Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Department of Family and Community Health Nursing, School of Nursing, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA.

出版信息

Stud Health Technol Inform. 2022 Jun 6;290:858-861. doi: 10.3233/SHTI220201.

DOI:10.3233/SHTI220201
PMID:35673140
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9218260/
Abstract

Social distancing and "lockdown" measures introduced by the COVID-19 pandemic created barriers to recruitment and engagement of community members in research activities. Information technology tools were quickly introduced to allow for virtual participation of stakeholders in research. Vulnerable populations, namely communities with limited access to resources or at a higher risk to experience bias or discrimination, were less likely to engage in such virtual research initiatives. Informatics tools have the potential to support these populations, but existing disparities require a careful consideration of engagement strategies. We discuss three case studies of ongoing research projects targeting vulnerable populations and highlight the role of informatics in facilitating engagement. Target populations include family caregivers of hospice patients, low-income older adults and patients with dementia and their families. We describe strategies to overcome unique challenges introduced by the pandemic, and ways to build a more resilient future.

摘要

新冠疫情大流行期间采取的社交隔离和“封城”措施为招募和让社区成员参与研究活动带来了障碍。信息技术工具很快被引入,以允许利益攸关方虚拟参与研究。弱势群体,即资源有限或更有可能经历偏见或歧视的社区,不太可能参与此类虚拟研究计划。信息学工具有可能为这些人群提供支持,但现有的差距需要仔细考虑参与策略。我们讨论了三个针对弱势群体的正在进行的研究项目的案例研究,并强调了信息学在促进参与方面的作用。目标人群包括临终关怀患者的家庭护理者、低收入的老年人以及痴呆症患者及其家属。我们描述了克服大流行带来的独特挑战的策略,以及建立更具弹性的未来的方法。

相似文献

1
Using Informatics to Engage Vulnerable Populations in Research: Lessons Learned from the COVID-19 Pandemic.利用信息学让弱势群体参与研究:从 COVID-19 大流行中吸取的经验教训。
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2022 Jun 6;290:858-861. doi: 10.3233/SHTI220201.
2
Engaging diverse populations in aging research during the COVID-19 pandemic: Lessons learned from four National Institutes of Health funded-Centers.在 COVID-19 大流行期间让不同人群参与老龄化研究:四个美国国立卫生研究院资助的中心的经验教训。
Front Public Health. 2023 Apr 4;11:1062385. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1062385. eCollection 2023.
3
Dementia-friendly initiatives within the context of COVID-19 pandemic: Challenges and strategies perceived by service professional stakeholders from the USA and China.在 COVID-19 大流行背景下的痴呆症友好型举措:来自美国和中国的服务专业利益相关者所感知的挑战和策略。
Dementia (London). 2022 Jul;21(5):1714-1733. doi: 10.1177/14713012221089416. Epub 2022 Apr 26.
4
Mitigating the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on vulnerable populations: Lessons for improving health and social equity.减轻 COVID-19 大流行对弱势群体的影响:改善健康和社会公平的经验教训。
Soc Sci Med. 2023 Jul;328:116007. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.116007. Epub 2023 Jun 2.
5
Community engagement in deprived neighbourhoods during the COVID-19 crisis: perspectives for more resilient and healthier communities.社区在 COVID-19 危机期间参与贫困社区活动:建设更具弹性和更健康社区的观点。
Health Promot Int. 2022 Apr 29;37(2). doi: 10.1093/heapro/daab098.
6
Advancing shared accountability for meaningful community engagement with socially vulnerable communities: Lessons learned from COVID-19 health education and general outreach in an urban region.推进对与社会弱势群体进行有意义的社区参与的共同问责:从城市地区新冠疫情健康教育和一般外展活动中汲取的经验教训。
Transform Soc Work. 2023 Nov 29;1(1). doi: 10.55016/ojs/tsw.v1i1.77548.
7
Stakeholder engagement vs. social distancing-how does the Covid-19 pandemic affect participatory research in EU marine science projects?利益相关者参与与社交距离——新冠疫情如何影响欧盟海洋科学项目中的参与式研究?
Marit Stud. 2021;20(2):189-205. doi: 10.1007/s40152-021-00223-4. Epub 2021 May 14.
8
Lessons learned to improve COVID-19 response in communities with greatest socio-economic vulnerabilities.吸取教训,改善社会经济最脆弱社区的 COVID-19 应对工作。
BMC Public Health. 2023 Apr 6;23(1):659. doi: 10.1186/s12889-023-15479-0.
9
Examining the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on community engagement for people with mobility disabilities.考察新冠疫情对行动障碍人士社区参与的影响。
Disabil Health J. 2022 Jan;15(1S):101212. doi: 10.1016/j.dhjo.2021.101212. Epub 2021 Sep 1.
10
Virtual learning experiences in population health nursing course during the COVID-19 pandemic.COVID-19 大流行期间的人口健康护理课程中的虚拟学习体验。
Int Nurs Rev. 2021 Dec;68(4):557-562. doi: 10.1111/inr.12725. Epub 2021 Oct 25.

引用本文的文献

1
Smart Speaker and ICT Use in Relationship With Social Connectedness During the Pandemic: Loneliness and Social Isolation Found in Older Adults in Low-Income Housing.疫情期间智能音箱和信息通信技术的使用与社交关联性的关系:低收入住房中的老年人存在孤独和社会隔离问题。
Gerontologist. 2024 May 1;64(5). doi: 10.1093/geront/gnad145.
2
Lessons learned to improve COVID-19 response in communities with greatest socio-economic vulnerabilities.吸取教训,改善社会经济最脆弱社区的 COVID-19 应对工作。
BMC Public Health. 2023 Apr 6;23(1):659. doi: 10.1186/s12889-023-15479-0.

本文引用的文献

1
2021 Alzheimer's disease facts and figures.2021 年阿尔茨海默病事实和数据。
Alzheimers Dement. 2021 Mar;17(3):327-406. doi: 10.1002/alz.12328. Epub 2021 Mar 23.
2
Social relationships and mortality risk: a meta-analytic review.社会关系与死亡风险:一项荟萃分析研究。
PLoS Med. 2010 Jul 27;7(7):e1000316. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000316.
3
Utilization of internet technology by low-income adults: the role of health literacy, health numeracy, and computer assistance.低收入成年人对互联网技术的利用:健康素养、健康算数能力和计算机辅助的作用。
J Aging Health. 2010 Sep;22(6):804-26. doi: 10.1177/0898264310366161. Epub 2010 May 21.
4
Measuring the values and preferences for everyday care of persons with cognitive impairment and their family caregivers.衡量认知障碍者及其家庭照顾者日常护理的价值观和偏好。
Gerontologist. 2005 Jun;45(3):370-80. doi: 10.1093/geront/45.3.370.
5
Family perspectives on end-of-life care at the last place of care.家属对临终关怀最后场所的看法。
JAMA. 2004 Jan 7;291(1):88-93. doi: 10.1001/jama.291.1.88.
6
Differences between caregivers and noncaregivers in psychological health and physical health: a meta-analysis.照料者与非照料者在心理健康和身体健康方面的差异:一项荟萃分析。
Psychol Aging. 2003 Jun;18(2):250-67. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.18.2.250.
7
Caregiving: where families need help.
Soc Work. 1988 Sep-Oct;33(5):436-40. doi: 10.1093/sw/33.5.436.
8
Mental and physical health of caregiving spouses: development of a causal model.照顾配偶者的身心健康:因果模型的构建
J Gerontol. 1990 Sep;45(5):P192-9. doi: 10.1093/geronj/45.5.p192.