The digital divide in public e-health: Barriers to accessibility and privacy in state health department websites

Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved

Volumn 17, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 652-667

  West, Darrell M ^a,b   Miller, Edward Alan ^a,b  

^a Department of Public Policy and Political Science ^*

^b BROWN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Accessibility; Confidentially; Disability; E health; Geographic variation; Health literacy; Internet; Privacy; State governments

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMMUNICATION DISORDER; COMPREHENSION; DISABLED PERSON; GOVERNMENT; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HUMAN; INTERNET; METHODOLOGY; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PRIVACY; PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE; UNITED STATES;

COMMUNICATION BARRIERS; COMPREHENSION; DISABLED PERSONS; HEALTH SERVICES ACCESSIBILITY; HUMANS; INTERNET; PRIVACY; PUBLIC HEALTH ADMINISTRATION; STATE GOVERNMENT; UNITED STATES;

EID: 33748948237     PISSN: 10492089     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1353/hpu.2006.0115     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Castle NG, Lowe TJ. Report cards and nursing homes. Gerontologist. 2005 Feb;45(1):48-67.
2. Marshall MN, Shekelle PG, Leatherman S, et al. The public release of performance data: what do we expect to gain? A review of the evidence. JAMA. 2005 Apr;283(14):1866-74.
3. Chassin MR. Achieving and sustaining improved quality: lessons from New York State and cardiac surgery. Health Aff (Millwood). 2002 Jul-Aug;21(4):40-51.
4. Eysenbach G, Powell J, Kuss O, et al. Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the world wide web: a systematic review. JAMA. 2002 May 22-29;287(20):2691-700.
5. Purcell GP, Wilson P, Delamothe T. The Quality of information on the internet. BMJ. 2002 Mar 9;324(7337):557-8.
6. Jadad AR, Gagliardi A. Rating health information on the Internet: navigating to knowledge or to babel? JAMA. 1998 Feb 25;279(8):611-4.
7. Fox S. Digital divisions: there are clear differences among those with broadband connections, dial-up connections, and no connections at all to the internet. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project, 2005 Oct 5.
8. Brodie M, Flournoy RE, Altman DE, et al. Health information, the Internet and the digital divide. Health Aff (Millwood). 2000 Nov-Dec;19(6):255-65.
9. Risk A, Petersen C. Health information on the internet: quality issues and international initiatives. JAMA. 2002 May 22-29;287(20):2713-5.
10. United States Access Board. Section 508 facts: understanding Section 508 and the Access Board's standards. Washington, DC: Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, 1998. Available at http://www.access-board.gov/sec508/brochure .htm.
11. West DM. E-Government and the transformation of service delivery and citizen attitudes. Public Admin Rev. 2004 Feb;64(1):15-27.
12. Moon MJ. The evolution of e-government among municipalities: rhetoric or reality? Public Admin Rev. 2002 Jul/Aug;62(4):424-33.
13. Hodge JG Jr, Gostin LO, Jacobson PD. Legal issues concerning electronic health information. JAMA. 1999 October 20;282(15):1466-71.
14. Council for Excellence in Government. The new e-government equation: ease, engagement, privacy and protection. Washington, DC: Council for Excellence in Government, 2003 Apr.
15. Goldman J, Hudson Z. Virtually exposed: privacy and e-health. Health Aff (Millwood). 2000 Nov-Dec;19(6):140-8.
16. White S, Dillow S. Key concepts and features of the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy. (NCES 2006-471.) Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), U.S. Department of Education, 2005 Dec.
17. Kutner M, Greenberg E, Baer J. A first look at the literacy of America's adults in the 21st century. (NCES 2006-470.) Washington, DC: NCES, U.S. Department of Education, December 2005.
18. Howard DH, Gazmararian J, Parker R. The impact of low health literacy on the medical costs of Medicare managed care enrollees. Am J Med. 2005 Apr;118(4):371-7.
19. Gazmararian JA, Curran JW, Parker RM, et al. Public health literacy in America: an ethical imperative. Am J Prev Med. 2005 Apr;28(3):317-22.
20. Schillinger D, Grumbach K, Piette J, et al. Association of health literacy with diabetes outcomes. JAMA. 2002 Jul 24-31;288(4):475-82.
21. Selden CR, Zorn M, Ratzan S, et al. Health literacy: January 1990 through October 1999, 479 citations. (Current Bibliographies in Medicine, CBM 2000-1.) Bethesda, MD: National Institute of Health, National Library of Medicine, February 2000.
22. Anonymous. Health literacy: a report of the Council on Scientific Affairs. Ad Hoc Committee on Health Literacy for the Council on Scientific Affairs, American Medical Association. JAMA. 1999 Feb 10;281(6):552-7.
23. Shire N. Effects of race, ethnicity, gender, culture, literacy, and social marketing on public health. J Gend Specif Med. 2002 Mar-Apr;5(2):48-54.
24. Bennett CL, Ferreira MR, Davis TC, et al. Relation between literacy, race, and stage of presentation among low-income patients with prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1998 Sep;16(9):3101-4.
25. Paasche-Orlow MK, Parker RM, Gazmararian JA, et al. The prevalence of limited health literacy. J Gen Intern Med. 2005 Feb;20(2):175-84.
26. Mayer GG Villaire M. Low health literacy and its effects on patient care. J Nurs Adm. 2004 Oct;34(10):440-2.
27. Waldrop J, Stern SM. Disability status: 2000. (C2KBR-17.) Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau, 2003.
28. Shin H, Bruno R. Language Use and English-Speaking Ability: 2000. Census 2000 Brief. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau, October 2003.
29. Fiscella K, Franks P, Doescher MP, et al. Disparities in health care by race, ethnicity, and language among the insured: findings from a national sample. Med Care. 2002 Jan;40(1):52-9.
30. Derose KP, Baker DW. Limited English proficiency and Latino's use of physician services. Med Care Res Rev. 2000 Mar;57(1):76-91.
31. Wahlberg D. Patient records exposed on web. Ann Arbor News. 1999 Feb 10:1.
32. Miller EA. State discretion and Medicaid program variation in long-term care: when is enough, enough? J Aging Soc Policy. 2002;14(3/4):15-35.
33. Horrigan J, Murray K. Rural broadband internet use. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project, 2006 Feb.
34. Anonymous. Webuse: Scientific Research on the Internet. Estimated Internet Usage Differences by Basic General Social Survey Demographics. College Park, MD: University of Maryland, 2002. Available at http://www.webuse.umd.edu/ handouts/tutorial/SDA-GSS_Tutorial.pdf.
35. Kincaid JP, Fishburne RP Jr, Rogers RL, et al. Derivation of new readability formulas (Automated Readability Index, Fog Count and Flesch Reading Ease Formula) for navy enlised personnel. (Research Branch Reports 8-75.) Millington, TN: Naval Technical Training, U.S. Naval Air Station Memphis, 1975.
36. Kirsch IS, Jungeblut A, Jenkins L, et al. Adult literacy in America: a first look at the findings of the National Adult Literacy Survey. (NCES 1993-275.) Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, 1993.
37. Toner R. A nation challenged: flow of information; reconsidering security, U.S. clamps down on agency web sites. New York Times. 2001 Oct 28;1B:4.
38. Miller JJ. English is broken here. Policy Rev. 1996 Sep-Oct;79. Available at http://www .policyreview.org/sept96/miller.html.
39. Bratt L, Kim J, Sunderman G. Limited English proficient students: increased accountability under NCLB. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University, 2005 Feb.
40. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). HIPPA-General Information. Atlanta, GA: CMS, 2005. Available at http://www.cms.hhs.gov/ HIPAAGenInfo/.
41. Doyle C. The USA Patriot Act: A Sketch. (RS21203.) Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 2002 Apr 18.
42. The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks. The 911 Commission report: final report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, Authorized Edition. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2004 July 22.
43. Shin HB, Bruno R. Language use and English-speaking ability: 2000. Census 2000 Brief. (C2KBR-29.) Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau, October 2003.
44. West DM. Digital government: technology and public sector performance. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2005.
45. Shneiderman B. Universal usability. Communications of the ACM. 2000 May;43(5):84-91.
46. Gould M. Switzer seminar series remarks. Washington, DC: National Council on Disability, 2001 Oct 4. Available at http://www.ncd.gov/newsroom/testimony/ switzer_10-4-01.html.
47. Miller EA, Banaszak-Holl J. Cognitive and normative determinants of state policy making behavior: lessons from the sociological institutionalism. Publius: The Journal of Federalism. 2005 Spring;35(2):191-216.
48. Welch S, Thompson K. The impact of Federal incentives on state policy innovation. Am J Pol Sci. 1980 Nov;24(4):715-29.
49. Blumenthal D. Doctors in a wired world: can professionalism survive connectivity? Milbank Q. 2002;80(3):525-16, iv.