Treffer: Technology Access, Digital Literacy, and Enrollment Support Preferences in a Federally Qualified Health Center: Cross-Sectional Study.
Circ Res. 2023 Mar 3;132(5):652-670. (PMID: 36862812)
Toxicol Sci. 2015 Feb;143(2):231-41. (PMID: 25628401)
Nat Rev Genet. 2019 Sep;20(9):520-535. (PMID: 31235872)
Telemed J E Health. 2022 Mar 21;:. (PMID: 35324322)
Acad Med. 2017 Feb;92(2):157-160. (PMID: 27119325)
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2025 Aug 7;329:1540-1544. (PMID: 40776115)
Funct Integr Genomics. 2023 Jan 31;23(1):54. (PMID: 36719510)
Digit Health. 2025 Mar 28;11:20552076251325581. (PMID: 40162183)
New Media Soc. 2019 Feb;21(2):354-375. (PMID: 30886536)
Hum Genomics. 2021 Jul 20;15(1):46. (PMID: 34284826)
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2018 Aug 1;25(8):1080-1088. (PMID: 29788380)
JMIR Hum Factors. 2021 May 14;8(2):e27005. (PMID: 33988512)
JAMA Intern Med. 2023 Jan 1;183(1):50-60. (PMID: 36469312)
Clin Genet. 2020 Dec;98(6):525-547. (PMID: 32385895)
Int J Health Geogr. 2019 Feb 12;18(1):5. (PMID: 30755210)
J Med Internet Res. 2014 Jul 16;16(7):e172. (PMID: 25048379)
OMICS. 2023 Oct;27(10):461-473. (PMID: 37861713)
J Med Internet Res. 2006 Jun 16;8(2):e9. (PMID: 16867972)
Lancet. 2007 Oct 20;370(9596):1453-7. (PMID: 18064739)
Nat Rev Cardiol. 2017 Apr;14(4):187-188. (PMID: 28202900)
J Public Health Manag Pract. 2024 Mar-Apr 01;30(2):195-199. (PMID: 38271102)
J Med Internet Res. 2023 Feb 2;25:e41663. (PMID: 36729613)
JMIR Form Res. 2022 Nov 14;6(11):e40765. (PMID: 36374539)
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2021 Jan 15;28(1):119-125. (PMID: 32894772)
Health Equity. 2022 Jul 04;6(1):494-499. (PMID: 36186613)
Life Sci Soc Policy. 2015;11:3. (PMID: 26085313)
JMIR Aging. 2023 Mar 21;6:e43197. (PMID: 36943333)
BMJ Open. 2024 Oct 15;14(10):e082336. (PMID: 39414274)
Circ Res. 2022 Mar 4;130(5):782-799. (PMID: 35239404)
N Engl J Med. 2019 Aug 15;381(7):668-676. (PMID: 31412182)
Front Digit Health. 2023 Apr 13;4:1082098. (PMID: 37124163)
Weitere Informationen
Background: Biomedical research studies are increasingly using digital tools to enroll, recruit, and collect data from participants. However, variability in digital literacy and technological acceptance can be challenging for recruitment from groups traditionally underrepresented in research, including those served by Federally Qualified Health Centers.
Objective: This study aimed to (1) measure participant accessibility and comfort with digital platforms and (2) examine the interrelation of technology access, digital literacy, and support preferences during enrollment and data submission.
Methods: A cross-sectional analysis was conducted using enrollment data from Federally Qualified Health Centers participating in the All of Us Research Program. Participants had the option of High-Touch (staff-assisted) or Low-Touch (self-directed) support for enrollment and survey completion. Survey items assessed internet access and technology comfort, while support type was recorded by the research staff based on participants' actual selection. Logistic regression models evaluated relationships between technology access, comfort, and enacted support type, while controlling for age, consent language, and education, as well as race and ethnicity.
Results: The analytic sample included 605 participants. The majority reported access to the internet (539/605, 89.1%) and felt comfortable with technology (448/605, 74.1%). In the group requesting High-Touch support (n=346), 14.5% (n=50) reported no internet access, and 31.5% (n=109) felt uncomfortable with technology. In the group requesting Low-Touch support (n=259), 6.2% (n=16) had no access to the internet, and 3.9% (n=10) reported feeling uncomfortable (P<.001). In the adjusted models, much greater comfort with technology was significantly correlated with reduced odds of requesting High-Touch support (comfortable: adjusted odds ratio 0.118, 95% CI 0.055-0.255 and neutral: adjusted odds ratio 0.212, 95% CI 0.077-0.587), but internet access was not significantly correlated.
Conclusions: The strongest predictor for support preference for digital enrollment among the participants was their comfort with technology rather than access alone. These findings illustrate the significance of participant-centric design methods coupling adaptive support paths, mixed enrollment strategies, and individualized onboarding methods aligned with digital confidence to promote equitable engagement in precision health research.
(© Katrina Go Yamazaki, Lucy Hewitt, Luis Torres, Kharla Colon-Vazquez, Peyton Rogers, Grace Wang. Originally published in JMIR Formative Research (https://formative.jmir.org).)