The aim of this study was to systematically review the range, nature, and extent of current research activity exploring the influence of innovative health-related technologies on social inequalities in health, with specific focus on a deeper understanding of the variables used to measure this connection and the pathways leading to the (re)production of inequalities. A review process was conducted, based on scoping review techniques, searching literature published from January 1, 1996 to November 25, 2016 using MEDLINE, Scopus, and ISI web of science. Search, sorting, and data extraction processes were conducted by a team of researchers and experts using a dynamic, reflexive examination process. Of 4139 studies collected from the search process, a total of 33 were included in the final analysis. Results of this study include the classification of technologies based on how these technologies are accessed and used by end users. In addition to the factors and mechanisms that influence unequal access to technologies, the results of this study highlight the importance of variations in use that importantly shape social inequalities in health. Additionally, focus on health care services technologies must be accompanied by investigating emerging technologies influencing healthy lifestyle, genomics, and personalized devices in health. Findings also suggest that choosing one measure of social position over another has important implications for the interpretation of research results. Furthermore, understanding the pathways through which various innovative health technologies reduce or (re)produce social inequalities in health is context dependent. In order to better understand social inequalities in health, these contextual variations draw attention to the need for critical distinctions between technologies based on how these various technologies are accessed and used. The results of this study provide a comprehensive starting point for future research to further investigate how innovative technologies may influence the unequal distribution of health as a human right.

Background The educational attainment of parents, particularly mothers, has been associated with lower levels of child mortality, yet there is no consensus on the magnitude of this relationship globally. We aimed to estimate the total reductions in under-5 mortality that are associated with increased maternal and paternal education, during distinct age intervals.Methods This study is a comprehensive global systematic review and meta-analysis of all existing studies of the effects of parental education on neonatal, infant, and under-5 child mortality, combined with primary analyses of Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) data. The literature search of seven databases (CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) was done between Jan 23 and Feb 8, 2019, and updated on Jan 7, 2021, with no language or publication date restrictions. Teams of independent reviewers assessed each record for its inclusion of individual-level data on parental education and child mortality and excluded articles on the basis of study design and availability of relevant statistics. Full-text screening was done in 15 languages. Data extracted from these studies were combined with primary microdata from the DHS for meta-analyses relating maternal or paternal education with mortality at six age intervals: 0-27 days, 1-11 months, 1-4 years, 0-4 years, 0-11 months, and 1 month to 4 years. Novel mixed-effects meta-regression models were implemented to address heterogeneity in referent and exposure measures among the studies and to adjust for study-level covariates (wealth or income, partner's years of schooling, and sex of the child). This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020141731). FindingsThe systematic review returned 5339 unique records, yielding 186 included studies after exclusions. DHS data were compiled from 114 unique surveys, capturing 3 112 474 livebirths. Data extracted from the systematic review were synthesized together with primary DHS data, for meta-analysis on a total of 300 studies from 92 countries. Both increased maternal and paternal education showed a dose-response relationship linked to reduced under-5 mortality, with maternal education emerging as a stronger predictor. We observed a reduction in under-5 mortality of 31•0% (95% CI 29•0-32•6) for children born to mothers with 12 years of education (ie, completed secondary education) and 17•3% (15•0-18•8) for children born to fathers with 12 years of education, compared with those born to a parent with no education. We also showed that a single additional year of schooling was, on average, associated with a reduction in under-5 mortality of 3•04% (2•82-3•23) for maternal education and 1•57% (1•35-1•72) for paternal education. The association between higher parental education and lower child mortality was significant for both parents at all ages studied and was largest after the first month of life. The metaanalysis framework incorporated uncertainty associated with each individual effect size into the model fitting process, in an effort to dec...

Despite significant progress in the last few decades, infectious diseases remain a major threat to child health in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs)—particularly amongst more disadvantaged groups. It is imperative to understand the best available evidence concerning which public health interventions reduce morbidity, mortality and health inequalities in children aged under five years. To address this gap, we carried out an umbrella review (a systematic reviews of reviews) to identify evidence on the effects of public health interventions (promotion, protection, prevention) on morbidity, mortality and/or health inequalities due to infectious diseases amongst children in LMICs. Ten databases were searched for records published between 2014–2021 alongside a manual search of gray literature. Articles were quality-assessed using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews tool (AMSTAR 2). A narrative synthesis was conducted. We identified 60 systematic reviews synthesizing 453 individual primary studies. A majority of the reviews reported on preventive interventions (n = 48), with a minority on promotion (n = 17) and almost no reviews covering health protection interventions (n = 2). Effective interventions for improving child health across the whole population, as well as the most disadvantaged included communication, education and social mobilization for specific preventive services or tools, such as immunization or bed nets. For all other interventions, the effects were either unclear, unknown or detrimental, either at the overall population level or regarding health inequalities. We found few reviews reporting health inequalities information and the quality of the evidence base was generally low. Our umbrella review identified some prevention interventions that might be useful in reducing under five mortality from infectious diseases in LMICs, particularly amongst the most disadvantaged groups.

IntroductionDespite significant progress in the last few decades, infectious diseases remain a significant threat to children’s health in low-income and middle-income countries. Effective means of prevention and control for these diseases exist, making any differences in the burden of these diseases between population groups or countries inequitable. Yet, gaps remain in our knowledge of the effect these public health interventions have on health inequalities in children, especially in low-income and middle-income countries. This umbrella review aims to address some of these gaps by exploring which public health interventions are effective in reducing morbidity, mortality and health inequalities from infectious diseases among children in low-income and middle-income countries.Methods and analysisAn umbrella review will be conducted to identify systematic reviews or evidence synthesis of public health interventions that reduce morbidity, mortality and/or health inequalities due to infectious diseases among children (aged under 5 years) in low-income and middle-income countries. The interventions of interest are public health interventions targeting infectious diseases or associated risk factors in children. We will search for reviews reporting health and health inequalities outcomes in and between populations. The literature search will be undertaken using the Cochrane Library, Medline, EMBASE, the CAB Global Health database, Health Evidence, the Campbell Collaboration Library of Systematic Reviews, International Initiative for Impact Evaluation Systematic review repository, Scopus, the Social Sciences Citation Index and PROSPERO. Additionally, a manual search will be performed in Google Scholar and three international organisations websites (UNICEF Office of Research—Innocenti, UNICEF, WHO) to capture grey literature. Data from the records meeting our inclusion/exclusion criteria will be collated using a narrative synthesis approach.Ethics and disseminationThis review will exclusively work with anonymous group-level information available from published reviews. No ethical approval was required.The results of the review will be submitted for publication in academic journals and presented at international public health conferences. Additionally, key findings will be summarised for dissemination to a wider policy and general public audience as part of the Centre for Global Health Inequalities Research’s policy work.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019141673

The rapid evolution of Internet of Things (IoT) technologies, with ever more profound implications for humans and societies, has triggered visions and initiatives to re-align the Next-Generation IoT with what works for humans and humanity first. However, despite the increased push towards “human-centric” IoT, it is still poorly understood what “human-centric” actually means in this context, how it is interpreted and embedded into the design, by whom, and for which purposes. To address these questions, we conducted a systematic literature review (N = 84) on the theory, principles, and design requirements of human-centric IoT. A key observation is that, despite the recent increase in research on humane perspectives for IoT, “human-centredness” often still seems to be used primarily as a label and overarching paradigm, not leading to a profound change in the underlying practices. We found no shared understanding of what “human-centric” implies in this context or common agreement on which principles human-centric IoT should be built upon. Furthermore, our analysis confirmed the predominance of technology-oriented fields, with a traditional approach towards user involvement and limited involvement of other disciplines. Overall, our findings point towards an apparent discrepancy between how contributions are positioned and framed (“human-centric”), the practices and assumptions they are based on, and their actual impact and ability to orient existing efforts towards genuine human-centric outcomes and key values. Based on the results, we formulate directions for future research aimed at building a more human-centric and empowering IoT.