Health informatics interventions are designed to help people avoid, recover from, or cope with disease and disability, or to improve the quality and safety of healthcare. Unfortunately, they pose a risk of producing intervention-generated inequalities (IGI) by disproportionately benefiting more advantaged people. In this perspective paper, we discuss characteristics of health-related interventions known to produce IGI, explain why health informatics interventions are particularly vulnerable to this phenomenon, and describe safeguards that can be implemented to improve health equity. We provide examples in which health informatics interventions produced inequality because they were more accessible to, heavily used by, adhered to, or effective for those from socioeconomically advantaged groups. We provide a brief outline of precautions that intervention developers and implementers can take to guard against creating or worsening inequality through health informatics. We conclude by discussing evaluation approaches that will ensure that IGIs are recognized and studied.

Designing patient-centered consumer health informatics (CHI) applications requires understanding and creating alignment with patients' and their family members' health-related activities, referred to here as 'patient work'. A patient work approach to CHI draws on medical social science and human factors engineering models and simultaneously attends to patients, their family members, activities, and context. A patient work approach extends existing approaches to CHI design that are responsive to patients' biomedical realities and personal skills and behaviors. It focuses on the embeddedness of patients' health management in larger processes and contexts and prioritizes patients' perspectives on illness management. Future research is required to advance (1) theories of patient work, (2) methods for assessing patient work, and (3) techniques for translating knowledge of patient work into CHI application design. Advancing a patient work approach within CHI is integral to developing and deploying consumer-facing technologies that are integrated with patients' everyday lives.

No abstract

Background The COVID-19 health crisis has disproportionately impacted populations who have been historically marginalized in health care and public health, including low-income and racial and ethnic minority groups. Members of marginalized communities experience undue barriers to accessing health care through virtual care technologies, which have become the primary mode of ambulatory health care delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic. Insights generated during the COVID-19 pandemic can inform strategies to promote health equity in virtual care now and in the future. Objective The aim of this study is to generate insights arising from literature that was published in direct response to the widespread use of virtual care during the COVID-19 pandemic, and had a primary focus on providing recommendations for promoting health equity in the delivery of virtual care. Methods We conducted a narrative review of literature on health equity and virtual care during the COVID-19 pandemic published in 2020, describing strategies that have been proposed in the literature at three levels: (1) policy and government, (2) organizations and health systems, and (3) communities and patients. Results We highlight three strategies for promoting health equity through virtual care that have been underaddressed in this literature: (1) simplifying complex interfaces and workflows, (2) using supportive intermediaries, and (3) creating mechanisms through which marginalized community members can provide immediate input into the planning and delivery of virtual care. Conclusions We conclude by outlining three areas of work that are required to ensure that virtual care is employed in ways that are equity enhancing in a post–COVID-19 reality.

Objective We compare 5 health informatics research projects that applied community-based participatory research (CBPR) approaches with the goal of extending existing CBPR principles to address issues specific to health informatics research.Materials and methods We conducted a cross-case analysis of 5 diverse case studies with 1 common element: integration of CBPR approaches into health informatics research. After reviewing publications and other case-related materials, all coauthors engaged in collaborative discussions focused on CBPR. Researchers mapped each case to an existing CBPR framework, examined each case individually for success factors and barriers, and identified common patterns across cases.Results Benefits of applying CBPR approaches to health informatics research across the cases included the following: developing more relevant research with wider impact, greater engagement with diverse populations, improved internal validity, more rapid translation of research into action, and the development of people. Challenges of applying CBPR to health informatics research included requirements to develop strong, sustainable academic-community partnerships and mismatches related to cultural and temporal factors. Several technology-related challenges, including needs to define ownership of technology outputs and to build technical capacity with community partners, also emerged from our analysis. Finally, we created several principles that extended an existing CBPR framework to specifically address health informatics research requirements.Conclusions Our cross-case analysis yielded valuable insights regarding CBPR implementation in health informatics research and identified valuable lessons useful for future CBPR-based research. The benefits of applying CBPR approaches can be significant, particularly in engaging populations that are typically underserved by health care and in designing patient-facing technology.