Disparities and eHealth: Achieving the Promise and the Potential

  • Michael Christopher Gibbons

Over the last two decades, research from several distinct lines of investigation have coalesced to underscore the relationship between medical care, biophysiologic processes, and sociocultural and other environmental influences on healthcare outcomes generally and healthcare disparities specifically (see Chaps. 1–5). In the early 1980s, researchers examining variability in clinical practice patterns found nonrandom distributions in care across geographic locations. In the mid-1980s, the report of the Secretary’s Task Forces on Black and Minority Health highlighted the fact that the health of Blacks and minorities significantly lagged behind that of Whites in the US (Department of Health and Human Services, 1985). By the early 1990s, large scale epidemiologic studies confirmed earlier findings of nonrandom distribution of clinical practice patterns and the association between substandard care with low income and minority patients. These early findings encouraged a focus on healthcare quality problems with the US healthcare system, which revealed that problems associated with quality and healthcare disparities were in fact linked and should be considered together. In the case of healthcare disparities, the more recent attempts to address disparities have in most cases yielded disappointing results. As such, efforts were undertaken to clarify better the impact of “nonmedical” communications and social factors on healthcare disparities and healthcare outcomes. These investigations highlighted the need to integrate better the biomedical and sociobehavioral disciplines in current health care and clinical practice to improve quality and address disparities among an increasingly diverse population. They also highlighted the fact that communication barriers, literacy, as well as cultural and behavioral influences likely play a far more significant role in healthcare disparities than previously appreciated by the broader medical community.


Medical Informatics Computerize Physician Order Entry International Telecommunication Transdisciplinary Research Large Scale Epidemiologic Study 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Abrams, D. B. (2006). Applying transdisciplinary research strategies to understanding and eliminating health disparities. Health Education & Behavior, 33, 515–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, J. (2005). Imagining the internet: Personalities, predictions and perspectives. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.Google Scholar
  3. Boulos, M. N., Maramba, I., & Wheeler, S. (2006). Wikis, blogs and podcasts: A new generation of Web-based tools for virtual collaborative clinical practice and education. BMC Medical Education, 6, 41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Capitman, J., Bhalotra, S. M., Calderon-Rosado, V., & Gibbons, M. C. (2003). Cancer prevention and treatment demonstration for racial and ethnic minorities: Evidence report and evidence-based recommendations (Rep. No. 500–00-0031). US Department of Health and Human Services.Google Scholar
  5. Crane, R., & Raymond, B. (2003). Fulfilling the potential of clinical information systems. The Permanente Journal, 7, 62–67.Google Scholar
  6. Department of Health and Human Services. (1985). REPORT OF THE SECRETARY’S TASK FORCES ON BLACK AND MINORITY HEALTH. Washington, DC: DHHS.Google Scholar
  7. Gibbons, M. C. (2005). A historical overview of health disparities and the potential of eHealth solutions. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 7, e50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Gibbons, M. C. (2006a). Common ground: Exploring policy approaches to addressing racial disparities from the left and the right. The Journal of Healthcare Law and Policy, 9, 48–76.Google Scholar
  9. Gibbons, M. C. (2006b). Health inequalities and emerging themes in compunetics. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, 121, 62–69.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Giustini, D. (2006). How Web 2.0 is changing medicine. British Medical Journal, 333, 1283–1284.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. International Telecommunications Union. (2005). The Internet of things (Rep. No. 377–05). Geneva, Switzerland: The International Telecommunication Union.Google Scholar
  12. IOM Committee on Quality of Healthcare in America. (2001). Crossing the quality chasm: A new health system for the 21st century. Washington, DC: The National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  13. Lewin, S. A., Dick, J., Zwarenstein, M., Aja, G., van Wyk, B., Bosch-Capblanch, X., et al. (2003). Lay health workers in primary and community health care (Rep. No. CD004015.pub2). The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.Google Scholar
  14. Medical informatics (2nd ed.). (2001). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  15. National Health Service. (2004). Chronic disease management: A compendium of information. London, England: UK Department of Health.Google Scholar
  16. Nittoli, J. M., & Giloth, R. P. (1997). New careers revisited: Paraprofessional job creation for low-income communities. Social Policy, Winter, 44–61.Google Scholar
  17. Powell, J. A., Darvell, M., & Gray, J. A. (2003). The doctor, the patient and the world-wide web: How the internet is changing healthcare. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 96, 74–76.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Rosenthal, E. L. (1998). The final report of the national community health advisor study Baltimore: Annie E. Casey Foundation.Google Scholar
  19. Smedley, B. D., Stith, A. Y., & Nelson, A. R. (2003). Unequal treatment: Confronting racial and ethnic disparities in healthcare. Washington, DC: The National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  20. Tang, H., & Ng, J. H. (2006). Googling for a diagnosis–Use of Google as a diagnostic aid: Internet based study. British Medical Journal, 333, 1143–1145.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Christopher Gibbons
    • 1
  1. 1.Johns Hopkins Urban Health Institute (UHI)BaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations