Search

Health apps and wearables are touted to improve physical health and mental well-being. However, it is unclear from existing research the extent to which these health technologies are efficacious in improving physical and mental well-being at a population level, particularly for the underserved groups from the perspective of health equity and social determinants. Also, it is unclear if the relationship between health apps and wearables use and physical and mental well-being differs across individualistic, collectivistic, and a mix of individual–collectivistic cultures. A large-scale online survey was conducted in the U.S. (individualist culture), China (collectivist culture), and Singapore (mix of individual–collectivist culture) using quota sampling after obtaining ethical approval from the Institutional Review Board (IRB-2021-262) of Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore. There was a total of 1004 respondents from the U.S., 1072 from China, and 1017 from Singapore. Data were analyzed using multiple regression and negative binomial regression. The study found that income consistently had the strongest relationship with physical and mental well-being measures in all three countries, while the use of health apps and wearables only had a moderate association with psychological well-being only in the US. Health apps and wearables were associated with the number of times people spent exercising and some mental health outcomes in China and Singapore, but they were only positively associated with psychological well-being in the US. The study emphasizes the importance of considering the social determinants, social–cultural context of the population, and the facilitating conditions for the effective use of digital health technologies. The study suggests that the combined use of both health apps and wearables is most strongly associated with better physical and mental health, though this association is less pronounced when individuals use only apps or wearables. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

INTRODUCTION Positive perceptions of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) relative to combustible cigarettes (CCs) may erode support for endgame policies on CCs through smoking renormalization (increasing public acceptance of smoking). We investigated the associations between perceptions of e-cigarettes relative to CCs and support for endgame policies on CCs in Hong Kong. METHODS Adult respondents (N=2004) were surveyed using landline random digit dialing in 2015. Perceived relative harm and relative addictiveness of e-cigarettes were combined as an overall perception of e-cigarettes relative to CCs with 5 levels and we analyzed individually ‘neutral/positive/mixed/unknown’ perceptions against the ‘negative’ perception. Five individual items with dichotomous responses assessed the support for endgame policies on CCs. Support for banning the sale/use of CCs (yes/no) was also assessed. Multivariable regressions yielded adjusted odds ratios (AORs) of supporting endgame policies (individual policy items, all 5 policy items, at least 1 policy item, banning the sale/use of CCs) in relation to perceptions of e-cigarettes relative to CCs, adjusting for age, education attainment, marital status, CC smoking status and ever e-cigarette use. RESULTS Support for individual endgame policy items (from 51.8% to 80.0%), banning the sale (63.8%) and use (67.5%) of CCs were generally high. Few respondents perceived e-cigarettes as more harmful (16.6%) or more addictive (9.3%) than CCs. Positive perceptions of e-cigarettes (24.0%) were associated with less support for ‘ban CC sales in 10 years if there is a product providing nicotine not made from tobacco’ (AOR=0.62, 95% CI: 0.40–0.97), ‘ban CC use when it’s prevalence falls below 5%’ (AOR=0.66, 95% CI: 0.44–0.98) and ‘banning the sale of CCs’ (AOR=0.63, 95% CI: 0.42–0.94). CONCLUSIONS Positive perceptions of e-cigarettes relative to CCs were associated with less support for endgame policies on CCs in Hong Kong. Public health actions are needed to disseminate evidence-based knowledge of e-cigarettes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]