Search

The association between digitalization and individual health has attracted increasing attention from both scholars and policymakers. Existing research, however, has not agreed on whether digitization can improve health or reduce health inequality. The purpose of this study is to clarify whether and how the development of digitalization may be related to health and health disparities. We rely on China Family Panel Studies (CFPS) surveys from 2012 to 2018 to obtain a sample of 82,471 observations to explore the impact of digitalization on self-rated health and health inequality and its transmission mechanisms. The hypotheses are tested by Ordinary Least Squares Modeling. As expected, digitalization is significantly and positively correlated with self-rated health. Furthermore, the development of digitalization has led to a notable decrease in health inequality. The influencing mechanisms of digitalization include income, healthcare consumption and health behaviors. Both dimensions of digitalization—internet development and digital finance—generate significant effects and the effects of internet development are greater. This study is the first to systematically investigate the impact of digitalization development on health and health inequality. Our findings provide evidence for the health promotion theory by clarifying the benefits of digitalization in improving residents' health and reducing health inequality. Therefore, utilizing the tools of digitalization efficiently could be a focus of policymakers aiming to accomplish the SDGs' health targets. • This paper contributes to assess the health outcomes of digitalization in China. • Developing digitalization has greatly improved self-rated health of residents. • Also, digitalization has reduced health inequality between residents. • Digitalization can affect health through income, health consumption and behaviors. • Digitalization is a useful tool for policymakers to reach the SDGs' health goals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What are the insights from historical pandemics for policymaking today? We carry out a systematic review of the literature on the impact of pandemics that occurred since the Industrial Revolution and prior to Covid-19. Our literature searches were conducted between June 2020 and September 2023, with the final review encompassing 169 research papers selected for their relevance to understanding either the demographic or economic impact of pandemics. We include literature from across disciplines to maximise our knowledge base, finding many relevant articles in journals which would not normally be on the radar of social scientists. Our review identifies two gaps in the literature: (1) the need to study pandemics and their effects more collectively rather than looking at them in isolation; and (2) the need for more study of pandemics besides 1918 Spanish Influenza, especially milder pandemic episodes. These gaps are a consequence of academics working in silos, failing to draw on the skills and knowledge offered by other disciplines. Synthesising existing knowledge on pandemics in one place provides a basis upon which to identify the lessons in preparing for future catastrophic disease events. • Historical studies of pandemics typically measure some combination of their mortality, economic, morbidity and in utero impacts. • The 1918 Spanish Influenza pandemic is the most heavily studied historical pandemic of the last 200 years. • Most studies of historical pandemics are published in health sciences journals, including epidemiology. • Few studies join insights from social and medical sciences together. • Few studies compare the impacts of different pandemics, or the same pandemic across different study sites. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]