Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Equity-deserving groups face well-known health disparities that are exacerbated by rural residence. Health technologies have shown promise in reducing disparities among these groups, but there has been no comprehensive evidence synthesis of outcomes.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this systematic review was to examine the patient, healthcare, and economic outcomes of health technology applications with rural living equity-deserving groups.
METHODS: The databases searched included Medline and Embase. Articles were assessed for bias using the McGill mixed methods appraisal tool.
METHODS: Data were synthesized narratively using a convergent integrated approach for qualitative and quantitative findings.
RESULTS: This evidence synthesis includes papers (n = 21) that reported on health technologies targeting rural equity-deserving groups. Overall, patient outcomes - knowledge, self-efficacy, weight loss, and clinical indicators - improved. Healthcare access improved with greater convenience, flexibility, time and travel savings, though travel was still occasionally necessary. All studies reported satisfaction with health technologies. Technology challenges reported related to connectivity and infrastructure issues influencing appointment quality and modality options. While some studies reported additional costs, overall, studies indicated cost savings for patients.
CONCLUSIONS: There is a paucity of research on health technologies targeting rural equity-deserving groups, and the available research has primarily focused on women. While current evidence was primarily of high quality, research is needed inclusive of equity-deserving groups and interventions co-designed with users that integrate culturally sensitive approaches. Review registered with Prospero ID = CRD42021285994.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this systematic review was to examine the patient, healthcare, and economic outcomes of health technology applications with rural living equity-deserving groups.
METHODS: The databases searched included Medline and Embase. Articles were assessed for bias using the McGill mixed methods appraisal tool.
METHODS: Data were synthesized narratively using a convergent integrated approach for qualitative and quantitative findings.
RESULTS: This evidence synthesis includes papers (n = 21) that reported on health technologies targeting rural equity-deserving groups. Overall, patient outcomes - knowledge, self-efficacy, weight loss, and clinical indicators - improved. Healthcare access improved with greater convenience, flexibility, time and travel savings, though travel was still occasionally necessary. All studies reported satisfaction with health technologies. Technology challenges reported related to connectivity and infrastructure issues influencing appointment quality and modality options. While some studies reported additional costs, overall, studies indicated cost savings for patients.
CONCLUSIONS: There is a paucity of research on health technologies targeting rural equity-deserving groups, and the available research has primarily focused on women. While current evidence was primarily of high quality, research is needed inclusive of equity-deserving groups and interventions co-designed with users that integrate culturally sensitive approaches. Review registered with Prospero ID = CRD42021285994.
摘要：
背景：享有公平待遇的群体面临着众所周知的健康差距，农村居住加剧了这种差距。卫生技术在减少这些群体之间的差距方面显示出了希望，但目前还没有关于结果综合的全面证据.
目的：本系统评价的目的是检查患者，healthcare,以及农村生活公平群体的卫生技术应用的经济成果。
方法：检索的数据库包括Medline和Embase。使用McGill混合方法评估工具评估文章的偏倚。
方法：使用融合的综合方法对定性和定量结果进行叙述性综合。
结果：本证据综合包括报告针对农村公平群体的卫生技术的论文（n=21）。总的来说,患者结果-知识，自我效能感,减肥,和临床指标-改善。通过更大的便利性改善了医疗保健访问，灵活性,节省时间和旅行，虽然旅行偶尔还是必要的。所有研究都报告了对卫生技术的满意度。报告的技术挑战涉及影响预约质量和方式选择的连通性和基础设施问题。虽然一些研究报告了额外的费用，总的来说,研究表明为患者节省了成本。
结论：针对农村公平群体的卫生技术研究很少，现有的研究主要集中在女性身上。虽然目前的证据主要是高质量的，需要进行研究，包括与整合文化敏感方法的用户共同设计的应得公平的团体和干预措施。在ProsperoID=CRD42021285994注册的审查。
目的：本系统评价的目的是检查患者，healthcare,以及农村生活公平群体的卫生技术应用的经济成果。
方法：检索的数据库包括Medline和Embase。使用McGill混合方法评估工具评估文章的偏倚。
方法：使用融合的综合方法对定性和定量结果进行叙述性综合。
结果：本证据综合包括报告针对农村公平群体的卫生技术的论文（n=21）。总的来说,患者结果-知识，自我效能感,减肥,和临床指标-改善。通过更大的便利性改善了医疗保健访问，灵活性,节省时间和旅行，虽然旅行偶尔还是必要的。所有研究都报告了对卫生技术的满意度。报告的技术挑战涉及影响预约质量和方式选择的连通性和基础设施问题。虽然一些研究报告了额外的费用，总的来说,研究表明为患者节省了成本。
结论：针对农村公平群体的卫生技术研究很少，现有的研究主要集中在女性身上。虽然目前的证据主要是高质量的，需要进行研究，包括与整合文化敏感方法的用户共同设计的应得公平的团体和干预措施。在ProsperoID=CRD42021285994注册的审查。
