Chatbots, ChatGPT, and Scholarly Manuscripts

Chatbots, ChatGPT, and Scholarly Manuscripts

Chatbots, ChatGPT, and Scholarly Manuscripts
WAME Recommendations on ChatGPT and Chatbots in Relation to Scholarly Publications

 

January 20, 2023

 

Chris Zielinski1; Margaret Winker2; Rakesh Aggarwal3; Lorraine Ferris4; Markus Heinemann5; Jose Florencio Lapeña, Jr.6; Sanjay Pai7; Edsel Ing8; Leslie Citrome9; on behalf of the WAME Board

 

1Vice President, WAME; Centre for Global Health, University of Winchester, UK; 2Trustee, WAME; 3President, WAME; Associate Editor, Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology; Director, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research, Puducherry, India; 4Trustee, WAME; Professor, Dalla Lana School of  Public Health, University of Toronto; 5Treasurer, WAME; Editor-in-Chief, The Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeon; 6Secretary, WAME; Editor, Philippine Journal of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery; 7Director, WAME; Working Committee, The National Medical Journal of India; 8Director, WAME; Section Editor, Canadian Journal of Ophthalmology; Professor, University of Toronto; 9Director, WAME; Editor-in-Chief, Current Medical Research, and Opinion; Clinical Professor of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, New York Medical College

Journals have begun to publish papers in which chatbots such as ChatGPT are shown as co-authors. The following WAME recommendations are intended to inform editors and help them develop policies regarding chatbots for their journals, to help authors understand how the use of chatbots might be attributed to their work, and address the need for all journal editors to have access to manuscript screening tools. In this rapidly evolving field, we expect these recommendations to evolve as well. 

A chatbot is a tool “[d]riven by [artificial intelligence], automated rules, natural language processing (NLP), and machine learning (ML)…[to] process data to deliver responses to requests of all kinds.”1 Artificial intelligence (AI) “broadly refers to the idea of computers that can learn and make decisions in a human-like way.”2 Chatbots have been used in recent years by many companies, including those in healthcare, for providing customer service, routing requests, or gathering information.

ChatGPT is a recently-released chatbot that “is an example of generative AI because it can create something completely new that has never existed before,”3 in the sense that it can use existing information organized in new ways. ChatGPT has many potential uses, including “summarising long articles, for example, or producing a first draft of a presentation that can then be tweaked.”4 It may help researchers, students, and educators generate ideas,5 and even write essays of reasonable quality on a particular topic.6 Universities are having to revamp how they teach as a result.7

ChatGPT has many limitations, as recognized by its own creators: “ChatGPT sometimes writes plausible-sounding but incorrect or nonsensical answers…Ideally, the model would ask clarifying questions when the user provided an ambiguous query. Instead, our current models usually guess what the user intended… While we’ve made efforts to make the model refuse inappropriate requests, it will sometimes respond to harmful instructions or exhibit biased behavior.”8 And, “[u]nlike Google, ChatGPT doesn’t crawl the web for information on current events, and its knowledge is restricted to things it learned before 2021, making some of its answers feel stale.”9 OpenAI is currently working on an improved version that is “better at generating text than previous versions” and several other companies are creating their own “generative AI tools.”7

Chatbots are “trained” using libraries of existing texts. Consequently, in response to specific input from the human operator (a “question” or “seed text”), chatbots respond with an “answer” or other output. Ultimately, this output comprises a selection of the training materials adapted according to the algorithms. Since chatbots are not conscious,10 they can only repeat and rearrange existing material. No new thought goes into their statements: they can only be original by accident. Since chatbots draw on the library of existing texts on which they were trained, there is a risk that they might repeat them verbatim in some circumstances, without revealing their source. According to a recent preprint that used ChatGPT to generate text, “The percentage of correct references in the preliminary text, obtained directly from ChatGPT, was just 6%.”11 Thus, if chatbot output is to be published in an academic journal, to avoid plagiarism, the human author and editor must ensure that the text includes full correct references, to exactly the same degree as is required of human authors.

More alarmingly, ChatGPT may actually be capable of lying intentionally – “the intentionality is important, as the liar knows the statement they are making is false but does it anyway to fulfill some purpose…” as demonstrated by Davis.12  Of course, ChatGPT is not sentient and does not “know” it is lying, but its programming enables it to fabricate “facts.”

Chatbots are not legal entities and do not have a legal personality. One cannot sue, arraign in court, or punish a chatbot in any way. The terms of use and accepted responsibilities for the results of using the software are set out in the license documentation issued by the company making the software available. Such documentation is similar to that produced for other writing tools, such as Word, PowerPoint, etc. Just as Microsoft accepts no responsibility for whatever one writes with Word, ChatGPT’s creator OpenAI accepts no responsibility for any text produced using their product: their terms of use include indemnity, disclaimers, and limitations of liability.13 Only ChatGPT’s users would be potentially liable for any errors it makes. Thus, listing ChatGPT as an author, which is already happening14,15 and even being encouraged,16 may be misdirected and not legally defensible.

While ChatGPT may prove to be a useful tool for researchers, it represents a threat to scholarly journals because ChatGPT-generated articles may introduce false or plagiarized content into the published literature. Peer review may not detect ChatGPT-generated content: researchers can have a difficult time distinguishing ChatGPT-generated abstracts from those written by authors.17 Those most knowledgeable about the tool are wary: a large AI conference banned the use of ChatGPT and other AI language tools for conference papers.17

Looked at in another way, chatbots help produce fraudulent papers; such an act goes against the very philosophy of science. It may be argued that the use of chatbots resembles papermills albeit with a small difference — though the latter clearly has the intention to deceive, this may not always be true for the use of chatbots. However, the mere fact that AI is capable of helping generate erroneous ideas makes it unscientific and unreliable, and hence should have editors worried.

On a related note, the year 2022 also saw the release of DALE-E 2,18 another ML-based system that can create realistic images and art from a description submitted to it as natural language text, by OpenAI, the same company that has made ChatGPT. More recently, Google has also released a similar product named Imagen.19 These tools too have raised concerns somewhat similar to those with ChatGPT. Interestingly, each image generated using DALE-E 2 includes a signature in the lower right corner, to indicate the image’s provenance20; however, it can be easily removed using one of several simple methods that are a web search away.

With the advent of ChatGPT and DALE-E 2, and with more tools on the anvil, editors need to establish journal policies on the use of such technology and require the tools to be able to detect content it generates. Scholarly publishing guidelines for authors should be developed with input from diverse groups including researchers whose first language is not English. This may take some time. In the meantime, we offer the following recommendations for editors and authors.

WAME Recommendations:

  1. Chatbots cannot be authors. Chatbots cannot meet the requirements for authorship as they cannot understand the role of authors or take responsibility for the paper. Chatbots cannot meet ICMJE authorship criteria, particularly “Final approval of the version to be published” and “Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.”21A chatbot cannot understand a conflict of interest statement or have the legal standing to sign a statement. Chatbots have no affiliation independent of their creators. They cannot hold copyright. Authors submitting a manuscript must ensure that all those named as authors meet the authorship criteria, which clearly means that chatbots should not be included as authors.
  2. Authors should be transparent when chatbots are used and provide information about how they were used. Since the field is evolving quickly at present, authors using a chatbot to help them write a paper should declare this fact and provide full technical specifications of the chatbot used (name, version, model, source) and method of application in the paper they are submitting (query structure, syntax). This is consistent with the ICMJE recommendation of acknowledging writing assistance.22
  3. Authors are responsible for the work performed by a chatbot in their paper (including the accuracy of what is presented, and the absence of plagiarism) and for appropriate attribution of all sources (including for material produced by the chatbot). Human authors of articles written with the help of a chatbot are responsible for the contributions made by chatbots, including their accuracy. They must be able to assert that there is no plagiarism in their paper, including in-text produced by the chatbot. Human authors must ensure there is appropriate attribution of all quoted material, including full citations. They should declare the specific query function used with the chatbot. Authors will need to seek and cite the sources that support the chatbot’s statements. Since a chatbot may be designed to omit sources that oppose viewpoints expressed in its output, it is the authors’ duty to find, review and include such counterviews in their articles.
  4. Editors need appropriate tools to help them detect content generated or altered by AI and these tools must be available regardless of their ability to pay. Many medical journal editors use manuscript evaluation approaches from the 20thcentury but now find themselves face-to-face with AI innovations and industries from the 21stcentury, including manipulated plagiarized text and images and paper mill-generated documents. They have already been at a disadvantage when trying to sort the legitimate from the fabricated, and chatbots such as ChatGPT take this challenge to a new level. Editors need access to tools that will help them evaluate content efficiently and accurately. Publishers working through STM are already developing such tools.23 Such tools should be made available to editors regardless of ability to pay for them, for the good of science and the public. Facilitating their use through incorporation into open-source publishing software such as Public Knowledge Project’s Open Journal Systems,24 and education about the use and interpretation of screening outputs, would make automated screening of manuscript submissions a much-needed reality for many editors.

 

References

  1. What is a chatbot? Oracle Cloud Infrastructure. Accessed January 18, 2023. https://www.oracle.com/chatbots/what-is-a-chatbot/
  2. Newman J. ChatGPT? Stable diffusion? Generative AI jargon, explained. Fast Company. December 26, 2022.Accessed January 18, 2023. https://www.fastcompany.com/90826308/chatgpt-stable-diffusion-generative-ai-jargon-explained
  3. Marr B. How Will ChatGPT affect your job if you work in advertising and marketing? Forbes. January 17, 2023. Accessed January 18, 2023. https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2023/01/17/how-will-chatgpt-affect-your-job-if-you-work-in-advertising-and-marketing/?sh=241ef86c39a3
  4. Naughton J. The ChatGPT bot is causing panic now – but it’ll soon be as mundane a tool as Excel. The Guardian. January 7, 2023. Accessed January 18, 2023. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jan/07/chatgpt-bot-excel-ai-chatbot-tech
  5. Roose K. Don’t Ban ChatGPT in Schools. Teach With It. NYTimes. January 12, 2023. Accessed January 18, 2023. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/12/technology/chatgpt-schools-teachers.html
  6. Hern A. AI bot ChatGPT stuns academics with essay-writing skills and usability. The Guardian. December 4, 2022. Accessed January 18, 2023. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/dec/04/ai-bot-chatgpt-stuns-academics-with-essay-writing-skills-and-usability
  7. Huang K. Alarmed by A.I. Chatbots, Universities Start Revamping How They Teach. NYTimes. January 16, 2023.Accessed January 18, 2023. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/16/technology/chatgpt-artificial-intelligence-universities.html
  8. ChatGPT. Open AI. Accessed January 18, 2022.https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt/
  9. Roose K. The Brilliance and Weirdness of ChatGPT. NYTImes. December 5, 2022. Accessed January 18, 2023. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/05/technology/chatgpt-ai-twitter.html
  10. Vallance C. Google engineer says Lamda AI system may have its own feelings. BBC News. June 13, 2022. Accessed January 18, 2023. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-61784011
  11. Blanco-Gonzalez A, Cabezon A, Seco-Gonzalez A, et al. The role of AI in drug discovery: challenges, opportunities, and strategies. arXiv 2022. Accessed January 18, 2023.[preprint]. https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2212.08104. https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.08104
  12. Davis P. Did ChatGPT Just Lie To Me? The Scholarly Kitchen. January 13, 2023. Accessed January 18, 2023. https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2023/01/13/did-chatgpt-just-lie-to-me/
  13. Terms of use. OpenAI. December 13, 2022. Accessed January 18, 2023. https://openai.com/terms/
  14. O’Connor S, ChatGPT. Open artificial intelligence platforms in nursing education: tools for academic progress or abuse? Nurse Educ Pract. 2023;66:103537. doi: 10.1016/j.nepr.2022.103537
  15. ChatGPT Generative Pre-trained Transformer; Zhavoronkov A. Rapamycin in the context of Pascal’s Wager: generative pre-trained transformer perspective. Oncoscience. 2022;9:82-84. doi: 10.18632/oncoscience.571
  16. Call for case reports contest written with the assistance of chatGPT. Cureus. January 17, 2023. Accessed January 20, 2023. https://www.cureus.com/newsroom/news/164
  17. Else H. Abstracts written by ChatGPT fool scientists. Nature 613, 423 (2023). Accessed January 18, 2023.https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-00056-7
  18. DALL-E 2. OpenAI. Accessed January 20, 2023. https://openai.com/dall-e-2/
  19. Imagen. Google. Accessed January 20, 2023. https://imagen.research.google/
  20. Mishkin P, Ahmad L, Brundage M, Krueger G, Sastry G. DALL·E 2 preview – risks and limitations. Github. 2022. Accessed January 20, 2023. https://github.com/openai/dalle-2-preview/blob/main/system-card.md
  21. Who is an author? Defining the role of authors and contributors. ICMJE. Accessed January 18, 2023. https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html
  22. Non-author contributors, defining the role of authors and contributors. ICMJE. Accessed January 18, 2023. https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html
  23. STM integrity hub. STM. Accessed January 18, 2023. https://www.stm-assoc.org/stm-integrity-hub/.
  24. Open Journal Systems. Public Knowledge Project. Accessed January 18, 2023. https://pkp.sfu.ca/software/ojs/

 

Source: Zielinski C, Winker M, Aggarwal R, Ferris L, Heinemann M, Lapeña JF, Pai S, Ing E, Citrome L for the WAME Board. Chatbots, ChatGPT, and Scholarly Manuscripts: WAME Recommendations on ChatGPT and Chatbots in Relation to Scholarly Publications. WAME. January 20, 2023. https://wame.org/page3.php?id=106

Celebrating Love in February: The Importance of Heart Health

Celebrating Love in February: The Importance of Heart Health

February 14 is celebrated all over the world as Valentine’s day, which is the day to celebrate love in many forms. On this day, you will notice all the heart-shaped candies, gifts, and balloons. What many people may not know is that February is also Heart health awareness month. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-CDC)

I did some research that heart disease is the leading cause of death in both men and women in the United States. According to CDC data, one person dies from heart disease every 36 seconds. Approximately 659,000 people in the United States die from heart disease each year. It is at least 1 in every 4 deaths. 

The most common heart disease in the United States is coronary heart disease. In the year 2019, coronary heart disease killed 360,900 people. There have been 18.2 million adults of the age 20 years old and over who have coronary heart disease. In every 40 seconds in the United States, someone has a heart attack. In the United States, 805,000 people every year have a heart attack, and about 1 out 5 adults have a silent heart attack (CDC).

American adults who are at risk of heart disease are adults who have diabetes, overweight or obese, lack physical activity, and consume too much alcohol (CDC).

There are ways to prevent yourself from having heart disease. You need to choose to consume healthy food and drink, get physically active every day, keep a healthy weight, do not smoke, check your cholesterol, check your blood pressure, manage your diabetes, take your medication as directed by your doctor, and visit your doctor regularly (CDC).

The Global Health and Education Projects, Inc. provides one program that is focused on addressing heart health in the community. Called the Healthy Heart, this program is aimed at reducing the disparities in health outcomes caused by heart diseases. GHEP hopes that this program, for example, helps to create awareness of health diseases disparities and also gives people the opportunity to get to understand their risk factors for heart disease by offering community-based brief screening and interventions. You can read more about Healthy Heart on GHEP’s website. 

Personally, I had been overweight and had a poor diet most of my childhood and teen years. Ever since I switched to exercising at least 5 days out of the week and maintaining a healthy diet, I felt healthier than I did in my childhood and teen years. It is important to listen to your body and get the help that you need (CDC). This is to wish you a happy healthy heart month while also celebrating the month of love–Valentine’s Day.


Written By Chelsea Whittington is a volunteer with the Global Health and Education Projects, Inc. working under the mentorship of Kanisha Blake, BS, MPH.  


References

American Heart Month | NHLBI, NIH

Prevent Heart Disease | cdc.gov

How Much Do You Know About Stuttering as a Speech Disruption?

How Much Do You Know About Stuttering as a Speech Disruption?

October is the month of harvest and the celebration of Halloween. It’s a month full of thrills, chills, and tricks or treats. There is also a special day, that is unknown to people, which is an international stuttering awareness day, which is October 22nd.

Stuttering is a speech disorder that repeats syllables, sounds, or words. There are even interruptions with words or sounds called blocks. It also can include behaviors such as eye blinking, tremors, or quivering lips. Unfortunately, this affects job interviews, socializing, and communications. It could affect the person immediately, which is to feel anxious when speaking to people, speaking in front of an audience, or speaking on the phone. (National Institute of Deafness and Other Communication Disorders).

I did some research and found out how many people have this issue growing up. Approximately, 3 million Americans have an issue with stuttering. It affects people in different age groups. It often occurs during the age of 2 to 6 years old, which is the age when children start to learn their language skills. About 5 percent to 10 percent of children will have the issue of stuttering throughout most of their life. About 75 percent of children can learn to control their issues with stuttering, while the other 25 percent will have the issue of stuttering for the rest of their lives. (NIH)

There are two types of stuttering, there are development stuttering and neurological stuttering. Developmental stuttering comes from the child’s language abilities and is unable to meet with the child’s verbal speech. While neurological stuttering occurs from a stroke, head trauma, or a head injury. There are many different ways to help with your issues of stuttering, these include therapy for children, stuttering therapy, drug therapy, electronic devices, and self-help groups. (NIH)

Understandably, that growing up with a speech issue is quite frustrating and it can even affect your self-confidence. I grew up with a stuttering issue, and I had been dealing with it for most of my life. It is mainly because of my anxiety that influences my way of speaking. What had helped me is seeing a speech therapist. I also resorted to seeing a counselor and seeking medication for my anxiety, which has helped my stuttering issue tremendously. What also helped me is to speak a little slower and more clearly to avoid stuttering. Do not let the issues with stuttering conflict with your socializing skills with others, it is quite normal, and affects everyone. (NIH)


Written By Chelsea Whittington is a volunteer with the Global Health and Education Projects, Inc. working under the mentorship of Kanisha Blake, BS, MPH.  


References

NIH, National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, Stuttering

How Do You Save Yourself From Stress?

How Do You Save Yourself From Stress?

In the United States and around the world, the month of April each year is celebrated as Stress Awareness Month. Interestingly, April is also well known for its spring weather. With April now behind us, I wanted to take a few minutes to reflect on stress and share some tips on how we can untangle ourselves from stress and live a stress-free life. 

The stress awareness month is a month when health professionals show the statistics and percentages of people who reported stress-related mental or physical illnesses. The American Family Care notes that it is important to learn how to cope with stress and to deal with stressful situations in order to live a long and healthy life. The health professionals had joined forces every April to have the country be aware of the causes of stress and the treatments for stress. 

During the past year, no thanks to COVID-19 that ravaged the world, there had been an increased percentage of depression or anxiety disorder caused by stress, which suddenly increased from 36.4% to 41.5%, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The age group that had the largest increase in stress is 18-29 years old. At the beginning of 2020, it increased to 8%.  This includes those who do not have a high school diploma. Mental health treatments also increased during this time. During the past year, it has increased from 22.4% to 24.8%. Mental health needs also suddenly increased from 9.2% to 11.7%; this includes people that were in the age group from 18-59. During the past year, the percentage of mental health needs increased by 23.8% and increased by 2.8% says the CDC. 

There are three types of stress, including acute stress, episodic acute stress, and chronic stress, says the Mind Body Green (MBG) Health. Acute stress is when the individual is burdened by high stress by fleeting moments such as public speaking or meeting in the boss’s office. The signs of acute stress are high heart rate, tense muscles, strong emotions, and shortness of breath. Episodic acute stress is similar to acute stress, but due to increased frequency, it takes its toll on the body. It is from intensely stressful events such as tight deadlines or moving on from one crisis to another. Chronic stress is a constant experience over a long period of time, such as finances, trauma, or racism. It is when the body is flooded with stress hormones causing sleep trouble, reduced immune function, and a negative effect on cardiovascular health, according to MBG experts.

There are many ways to help with stress, such as exercising. The Mayo Clinic asserts that exercises can lower stress hormones and release endorphins, which improve your mood and a natural pain reliever. It can also improve your sleep and boosts your self-confidence. There are many exercises that you can try out that can be a good fit for you. There is yoga, zumba, walking, cycling, or dancing, adds experts from Mayo Clinic. 

Stress relief can also include spending time with friends and family, spending time with your pets, laughing, reducing your caffeine intake, deep breathing (meditation), listen to soothing music, practicing mindfulness (be optimistic), avoid procrastination, avoid watching television, write your thoughts and feelings down, and take a bubble bath, according to Mayo Clinic experts.

Every person in the world, including me, sometimes goes through a stress point in their lives. I used to be a “stress-eater” due to my anxiety and stress situations. This has led me to exercises for at least 30 minutes and meditation for 10 minutes a day. These gradually increased my positive outlook in my life and boosts my self-confidence. 

My last point for you all is to try not to make stress take over your life, learn how to sit back and relax even if it’s for a couple of minutes. Life is too short to worry over something that’s not going to last forever. People should take hikes with loved ones and learn to think positively.


Written By Chelsea Whittington is a volunteer with the Global Health and Education Projects, Inc. working under the mentorship of Kanisha Blake, BS, MPH.  


References

https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/stress-management/basics/stress-relief/hlv-20049495 

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7013e2.htm 

https://www.therecoveryvillage.com/mental-health/stress/related/stress-statistics/ 

https://www.verywellmind.com/what-kind-of-stress-is-good-for-you-3145055 

https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/16-ways-relieve-stress-anxiety 

HIV/AIDS: Celebrating 40 Years of Science & Activism

HIV/AIDS: Celebrating 40 Years of Science & Activism

President Joseph R. Biden commemorates 40 years of work to address HIV/AIDS.

Forty years ago today, five young men in Los Angeles, USA, were confirmed as the first known patients stricken with an illness that the world would later come to know as AIDS. In the decades since, more than 700,000 Americans and 32.7 million people worldwide have been lost to AIDS-related illnesses – a heartbreaking human toll that has disproportionately devastated LGBTQ+ communities, communities of color, and underserved and marginalized people around the world.

40 years after, the war against HIV/AIDS may be over in developed countries but not so in developing countries. GHEP is doing its part through our work advancing science and engaging researchers from across the global North and South to conduct meaningful research aimed at preventing the toll, salvaging human lives, communities and lives shattered.

Through the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief – and as the largest donor to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria – the U.S. has invested more than $85 billion since 2002 to support HIV programs around the world. Read More


I Am a Long-term Survivor of HIV

“I keep asking myself: What does it mean to be a “long-term survivor” of HIV? My feelings, words, and thoughts have been telling me: It’s complex. I am grateful for surviving.”


Supporting Long-Term Survivors of HIV

“It’s been nearly 35 years since I was diagnosed with HIV. I was infected in 1981 or 1982 before we knew anything about HIV, or how to protect ourselves. When I tested HIV positive in 1988, I was told I had less than two years to live and to “go home and start making.”


40 Years of HIV Progress

On June 5, 1981, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) described the first cases of rare pneumonia.

Digital Divide, Shorter Lifespan, and Poor Health

Digital Divide, Shorter Lifespan, and Poor Health

Residents of U.S. communities with low internet and computer use experience 7 years of shorter life expectancy than their counterparts in communities with high internet and computer use, so says a new research study.

In addition, residents of communities with low internet and computer use are at an increased risk of mortality from various chronic conditions, poor health, mental distress, hospitalization, smoking, obesity, and physical inactivity.

These findings were contained in a new research by researchers and policy makers from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and published in the journal, International Journal of Translational Medical Research and Public Health.

In the study led by Gopal Singh, PhD, researchers examined the socioeconomic, demographic, and health characteristics associated with computer and internet use in the U.S. They investigated these associations at the individual and community levels using big data from different sources such as the national census, health, and mortality data spanning 2013 to 2019.

According to Dr. Singh, “despite the significant increase in computer and internet use over the past two decades, few studies have examined socioeconomic, demographic, and health characteristics associated with computer and internet use,” adding that “community-level differences in computer and internet use and their associated health disparities have received little attention.”

The study team found startling gaps in broadband internet and computer use and related health inequalities in the U.S. According to the study:

  • More than a quarter million (or 34%) American Indians and Alaska Native adults, 5.1 million (23%) Blacks/African Americans, and 7.2 million (21%) Hispanics lack access to broadband internet.
  • Approximately 5.7 million (27%) adults with less than a high school education or living in poverty do not have broadband internet access.
  • More than 30% of the rural population (or 46 million people) lack access to broadband internet and 20% do not own or use computers. Lack of broadband internet access is particularly acute in small rural towns of America.

This is especially timely research as many health offices are closed and hospitals have shifted focus to testing and treating Coronavirus patients, patients seeking care or treatment services outside of those parameters, such as for prescription changes or refills, are asked to utilize telehealth.

The study also highlights that closing the social divide in internet and computer use can positively impact individual empowerment, educational attainment, economic growth, community development, access to health care and health-related information, and health promotions efforts.