On the imperative of thinking through the ethical, health equity, and social justice possibilities and limits of digital technologies in public health

被引:0
作者
Oralia Gómez-Ramírez
Ihoghosa Iyamu
Aidan Ablona
Sarah Watt
Alice X. T. Xu
Hsiu-Ju Chang
Mark Gilbert
机构
[1] British Columbia Centre for Disease Control,School of Population and Public Health
[2] University of British Columbia,undefined
[3] CIHR Canadian HIV Trials Network,undefined
来源
Canadian Journal of Public Health | 2021年 / 112卷
关键词
Public health; Digital technologies; Social justice; Ethics; Health equity; Digital health; Emergency response; Santé publique; technologies numériques; justice sociale; éthique; équité en santé; santé numérique; intervention d’urgence;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated both the positive and negative use, usefulness, and impact of digital technologies in public health. Digitalization can help advance and sustain the core functions of public health, including health promotion and prevention, epidemiological surveillance, and response to emergent health issues. Digital technologies are thus—in some areas of public discourse—presented as being both necessary and inevitable requirements to address routine and emergency public health issues. However, the circumstances, ways, and extent to which they apply remain a subject of critical reflection and empirical investigation. In this commentary, we argue that we must think through the use of digital technologies in public health and that their usefulness must be assessed in relation to their short- and long-term ethical, health equity, and social justice implications. Neither a sense of digital technological optimism and determinism nor the demands of addressing pressing public health issues should override critical assessment before development and implementation. The urgency of addressing public health emergencies such as the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic requires prompt and effective action, including action facilitated by digital technologies. Nevertheless, a sense of urgency cannot be an excuse or a substitute for a critical assessment of the tools employed.
引用
收藏
页码:412 / 416
页数:4
相关论文
共 93 条
[1]  
Azzopardi-Muscat N(2019)Towards an equitable digital public health era: Promoting equity through a health literacy perspective European Journal of Public Health 29 13-17
[2]  
Sørensen K(2020)Call for transparency of COVID-19 models Science 368 482-483
[3]  
Barton CM(2019)Ethical aspects of digital health from a justice point of view European Journal of Public Health 29 18-22
[4]  
Alberti M(2020)Digital health equity and COVID-19: The innovation curve cannot reinforce the social gradient of health Journal of Medical Internet Research 22 e19361-259
[5]  
Ames D(2016)Need for robust and inclusive public health ethics review of the monitoring of HIV phylogenetic clusters for HIV prevention Lancet HIV 3 e461-381
[6]  
Atkinson J-A(2019)Time to interrogate corporate interests in public health? Critical Public Health 29 257-17
[7]  
Bales J(2020)Ten reasons why immunity passports are a bad idea Nature 581 379-205
[8]  
Burke E(2017)Digital health now and in the future: Findings from a participatory design stakeholder workshop Digital Health 3 1-46
[9]  
Chen M(2020)Ethische Fragen von Digital Public Health [Ethical implications of digital public health] Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz 63 199-31
[10]  
Diallo SY(2020)Digital contact tracing, privacy, and public health Hastings Center Report 50 43-35