Like a Grinding Stone: How Crowdfunding Platforms Create, Perpetuate, and Value Health Inequities

Which Ethnography? Whose Ethnography? Medical anthropology's Epistemic Sensibilities Among Health Ethnographies

Medical anthropologists working in interdisciplinary teams often articulate expertise with respect to ethnography. Yet increasingly, health scientists utilize ethnographic methods. Through a comparative review of health ethnographies, and autoethnographic observations from interdisciplinary research, we find that anthropological ethnographies and health science ethnographies are founded on different epistemic sensibilities. Differences center on temporalities of research, writing processes, sites of social intervention, uses of theory, and analytic processes. Understanding what distinguishes anthropological ethnography from health science ethnography enables medical anthropologists - who sometimes straddle these two ethnographic modes - to better articulate their epistemic positionality and facilitate interdisciplinary research collaborations.

Racial Disparities in Medical Crowdfunding: The Role of Sharing Disparity and Humanizing Narratives

Americans have increasingly turned to online crowdfunding to pay for healthcare costs, but our understanding of the inequalities in medical crowdfunding remains limited. This study investigates racial disparities in medical crowdfunding outcomes and examines the role of communication in amplifying, altering, or even reducing the disparities. Using data from 1,127 medical crowdfunding campaigns on GoFundMe, the study found that beneficiaries of color received significantly fewer donations than their White counterparts. The differences in donations between racial groups were partly attributable to sharing disparities. Campaigns for beneficiaries of color were shared less via e-mail or social media than campaigns for White beneficiaries. Campaign narratives with more humanizing details about beneficiaries were associated with more donations. However, humanizing details did not predict more shares, nor were they linked to smaller disparities in campaign outcomes between racial groups. Post-hoc analyses showed that more humanizing details were linked to fewer campaign donations for male beneficiaries of color. The findings contribute to the scholarship addressing the intersections of communication and health inequality on digital platforms.

'Financial fallout' in the US biopharmaceutical industry: Maximizing shareholder value, regulatory capture, and the consequences for patients

Patients are suffering the consequences of financialization - as shareholders demand high returns from pharmaceutical companies, pharmaceuticals squeeze profits out of top-selling products, and insurers charge higher premiums for limited coverage, the impact of financialization cascades across the value chain to compound the burden of cost for patients. This article offers a novel theoretical perspective and methods for understanding how "financial fallout" has impacted the pharmaceutical value chain, health systems, and patients. Financial fallout describes the cascade of consequences characteristic of and essential to industries reshaped by financialization. It characterizes how the effects of financialization have become so thoroughly engrained in industries and societies as to seem inevitable and how the consequences are also devastating, like the fallout that follows nuclear disasters. The research represented here examines how processes of financial fallout: 1) cascade across the pharmaceutical value chain from innovation to commercialization; 2) are enacted through 'regulatory capture' as regulations meant to safeguard the public from the exigencies of the market ultimately serve the interests of industry; and 3) have devastating consequences for patients who need access to life-saving therapies. The analysis is developed through the example of the market for monoclonal antibodies in the US, and the specific case of Keytruda - one of the top-selling monoclonal antibodies marketed for cancer therapy, which generated over 14 USD billion in revenue in 2020 and 17 billion in 2021. It traces how processes of financial fallout cascade down the value chain to impact health systems and compound the cost of care for patients. Financial fallout signals dire trends in providing health services and access to medicines. It diagnoses how our options for saving lives and improving health are overdetermined by and infused with the interests of financial capital.

Assessing the Importance of Content Versus Design for Successful Crowdfunding of Health Education Games: Online Survey Study

Background

Health education games make health-related tasks enjoyable and interactive, thereby encouraging user participation. Entrepreneurs and health educators can leverage online crowdfunding platforms, such as Kickstarter, to transform their innovative ideas into funded projects.

Objective

This research focuses on health education game initiatives on Kickstarter. Through an online user survey, it aims to understand user perceptions and evaluate the significance of 8 distinct components that may influence the success of such crowdfunding initiatives.

Methods

A total of 75 participants evaluated games using 8 dimensions: game rules, learning objectives, narrative, content organization, motivation, interactivity, skill building, and assessment and feedback. The survey data were analyzed using descriptive statistical analysis, exploratory factor analysis, the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test, and multivariate analysis.

Results

Exploratory data analysis showed that, among the 8 dimensions, skill building, content organization, and interactivity were the top-ranking dimensions most closely associated with crowdfunding health education game. The 8 dimensions can be grouped into 3 categories from the exploratory factor analysis: game content-, instruction-, and game design-related components. Further statistical analysis confirmed the correlation between these dimensions with the successful crowdfunding of health education games.

Conclusions

This empirical analysis identified critical factors for game proposal design that can increase the likelihood of securing crowdfunding support.

The Use of Medical Crowdfunding to Mitigate the Personal Costs of Serious Chronic Illness: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Persons diagnosed with serious chronic illnesses and their caretakers experience multiple types of financial costs that strain their income and generate financial distress. Many turn to medical crowdfunding (MCF) to mitigate the harms of these costs on their health and quality of life.

OBJECTIVE

This scoping review aims to summarize the research on MCF for persons diagnosed with serious chronic illness regarding study designs and methods; the responsible conduct of research practices; and study foci as they relate to stress, stress appraisals, and the coping processes.

METHODS

This review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. Eligible studies were conducted in countries designated as high income by the World Bank and focused on beneficiaries diagnosed with serious chronic illness. The findings of the included studies were summarized as they related to the key concepts in a conceptual framework derived from an established stress, appraisal, and coping framework and a conceptual model of financial toxicity in pediatric oncology.

RESULTS

Overall, 26 studies were eligible for inclusion in the review. The main findings included a lack of integration of qualitative and quantitative approaches and the inconsistent reporting of the responsible conduct of research practices. The included studies focused on financial stressors that contributed to financial burden, such as out-of-pocket payments of medical bills, basic living expenses, medical travel expenses, and lost income owing to illness-related work disruptions. Few studies addressed stress appraisals as threatening or the adequacy of available financial resources. When mentioned, appraisals related to the global financial struggle during the COVID-19 pandemic or the capacity of social network members to donate funds. The consequences of MCF included the receipt of 3 forms of social support (tangible, informational, and emotional), privacy loss, embarrassment, and the propagation of scientifically unsupported information. Studies found that friends and family tended to manage MCF campaigns. Although most of the studies (21/26, 81%) focused on monetary outcomes, a few (5/26, 19%) concentrated on peoples' experiences with MCF.

CONCLUSIONS

The identified methodological gaps highlight the need for more robust and reproducible approaches to using the copious data available on public MCF platforms. The integration of quantitative and qualitative methods will allow for nuanced explorations of the MCF experience. A more consistent elaboration of strategies to promote the responsible conduct of research is warranted to minimize risk to populations that are vulnerable and express concerns regarding the loss of privacy. Finally, an examination of the unanticipated consequences of MCF is critical for the development of future interventions to optimize existing supports while providing needed supports, financial and nonfinancial, that are lacking.

Racial and gender disparities among highly successful medical crowdfunding campaigns

There has been growing recognition of the popularity of medical crowdfunding and research documenting how crowdfunding arises from, and contributes to, social and health inequities. While many researchers have surmised that racism could well play a role in medical crowdfunding campaign outcomes, research on these dynamics has been limited. No research to date has examined these dynamics among the most successful medical crowdfunding campaigns, focusing instead on average users' experiences or specific patient subpopulations. This paper analyzes key characteristics and demographics of the 827 most successful medical crowdfunding campaigns captured at a point in time in 2020 on the popular site GoFundMe, creating the first demographic archetype of "viral" or highly successful campaigns. We hypothesized that this sample would skew towards whiter, younger populations, more heavily represent men, and reflect critical illnesses and accidents affecting these populations, in addition to having visually appealing, well-crafted storytelling. Analysis supported these hypotheses, showing significant levels of racial and gender disparities among campaigners. While white men had the greatest representation, Black and Asian users, and black women in particular, were highly underrepresented. Like other studies, we find evidence that racial and gender disparities persist in terms of campaign outcomes as well. Alongside this quantitative analysis, a targeted discourse analysis revealed campaign narratives and comments reinforced racist and sexist tropes of selective deservingness. These findings add to growing calls for more health research into the ways that social media technologies shape health inequities for historically marginalized and disenfranchised populations. In particular, we underscore how successful crowdfunding campaigns, as a both a means of raising funds for health and a broader site of public engagement, may deepen and normalize gendered and racialized inequities. In this way, crowdfunding can be seen as a significant technological amplifier of the fundamental social causes of health disparities.

An overview of Fintech applications to solve the puzzle of health care funding: state-of-the-art in medical crowdfunding

Crowdfunding is emerging as an alternative form of funding for medical purposes, with capital being raised directly from a broader and more diverse audience of investors. In this paper, we have systematically researched and reviewed the literature on medical crowdfunding to determine how crowdfunding connects with the health care industry. The health care industry has been struggling to develop sustainable research and business models for economic systems and investors alike, especially in pharmaceuticals. The research results have revealed a wealth of evidence concerning the way crowdfunding is applied in real life. Patients and caregivers utilize web platform-based campaigns all over the world to fund their medical expenses, generally on a spot basis, using donation-based or even reward-based schemes, regardless of the health care system archetype (public, private insurance-based or hybrid). Academics have also focused on funding campaigns and the predictors of success (which range from social behaviour and environment to the basic demographics of the campaigners and their diseases) and on social and regulatory concerns, including heightened social inequality and stigma. While equity crowdfunding is disrupting the way many ventures/businesses seek capital in the market, our research indicates that there are no relevant or consistent data on the practice of medical equity crowdfunding in health care, apart from a few anecdotal cases.

Doing 'our bit': Solidarity, inequality, and COVID-19 crowdfunding for the UK National Health Service

The expanding phenomenon of crowdfunding for healthcare creates novel potential roles for members of the public as fundraisers and donors of particular forms of provision. While sometimes interpreted as an empowering phenomenon (Gonzales et al., 2018), or a potentially useful communication of unmet needs (Saleh et al., 2021), scholars have predominantly been critical of the way in which crowdfunding for healthcare normalises unmet needs and exacerbates entrenched inequalities (Berliner and Kenworthy, 2017; Igra et al., 2021; Paulus and Roberts, 2018). We report a thematic analysis of the text of 945 fundraising appeals created on JustGiving and GoFundMe in the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic, where the recipient was NHS Charities Together's dramatically successful COVID-19 Urgent Appeal. Unlike in existing accounts of individual healthcare crowdfunding, we identify the relative absence of both coherent problem definition and of a fundable solution within the pages. Instead, appeals are dominated by themes of solidarity and duty during the UK's 'hard' lockdown of 2020. A national appeal reduces the risks of crowdfunding exacerbating existing health inequalities, but we argue that two kinds of non-financial consequences of collective crowdfunding require further exploration. Specifically, we need to better understand how expanded practices of fundraising co-exist with commitment to dutiful, means-based funding of healthcare via taxation. We must also attend to how celebration of the NHS as a national achievement, might squeeze spaces for critique and challenge. Analyses of crowdfunding need to explore both financial and non-financial aspects of practices within different health system and historical contexts.