Rural and Urban Differences in the Adoption of New Health Information and Medical Technologies

Background This statewide survey sought to understand the adoption level of new health information and medical technologies, and whether these patterns differed between urban and rural populations. Methods A random sample of 7,979 people aged 18‐75 years, stratified by rural status and race, who lived in 1 of 34 Indiana counties with high cancer mortality rates and were seen at least once in the past year in a statewide health system were surveyed. Results Completed surveys were returned by 970 participants. Rural patients were less likely than urban to use electronic health record messaging systems (28.3% vs 34.5%, P = .045) or any communication technology (43.0% vs 50.8%, P = .017). Rural patients were less likely to look for personal health information for someone else's medical record (11.0% vs 16.3%, P = .022), look‐up test results (29.5% vs 38.3%, P = .005), or use any form of electronic medical record (EMR) access (57.5% vs 67.1%, P = .003). Rural differences in any use of communication technology or EMRs were no longer significant in adjusted models, while education and income were significantly associated. There was a trend in the higher use of low‐dose computed tomography (CT) scan among rural patients (19.1% vs 14.4%, P = .057). No significant difference was present between rural and urban patients in the use of the human papilloma virus test (27.1% vs 26.6%, P = .880). Conclusions Differences in health information technology use between rural and urban populations may be moderated by social determinants. Lower adoption of new health information technologies (HITs) than medical technologies among rural, compared to urban, individuals may be due to lower levels of evidence supporting HITs

Racial and Socioeconomic Disparities in Cancer-Related Knowledge, Beliefs, and Behaviors in Indiana

Background: This statewide survey examined differences in cancer-related knowledge, beliefs, and behaviors between racial and socioeconomic groups in select counties in Indiana. Methods: A stratified random sample of 7,979 people aged 18–75 who lived in one of 34 Indiana counties with higher cancer mortality rates than the state average, and were seen at least once in the past year in a statewide health system were mailed surveys. Results: Completed surveys were returned by 970 participants, yielding a 12% response rate. Black respondents were less likely to perceive they were at risk for cancer and less worried about getting cancer. Individuals most likely to perceive that they were unlikely to get cancer were more often black, with low incomes (less than $20,000) or high incomes ($50,000 or more), or less than a high school degree. Black women were greater than six times more likely to be adherent to cervical cancer screening. Higher income was associated with receiving a sigmoidoscopy in the last 5 years and a lung scan in the past year. Those with the highest incomes were more likely to engage in physical activity. Both income and education were inversely related to smoking. Conclusions: Socioeconomic and racial disparities were observed in health behaviors and receipt of cancer screening. Black individuals had less worry about cancer. Impact: Understanding populations for whom cancer disparities exist and geographic areas where the cancer burden is disproportionately high is essential to decision-making about research priorities and the use of public health resources

Roadmap for a sustainable circular economy in lithium-ion and future battery technologies

The market dynamics, and their impact on a future circular economy for lithium-ion batteries (LIB), are presented in this roadmap, with safety as an integral consideration throughout the life cycle. At the point of end-of-life (EOL), there is a range of potential options—remanufacturing, reuse and recycling. Diagnostics play a significant role in evaluating the state-of-health and condition of batteries, and improvements to diagnostic techniques are evaluated. At present, manual disassembly dominates EOL disposal, however, given the volumes of future batteries that are to be anticipated, automated approaches to the dismantling of EOL battery packs will be key. The first stage in recycling after the removal of the cells is the initial cell-breaking or opening step. Approaches to this are reviewed, contrasting shredding and cell disassembly as two alternative approaches. Design for recycling is one approach that could assist in easier disassembly of cells, and new approaches to cell design that could enable the circular economy of LIBs are reviewed. After disassembly, subsequent separation of the black mass is performed before further concentration of components. There are a plethora of alternative approaches for recovering materials; this roadmap sets out the future directions for a range of approaches including pyrometallurgy, hydrometallurgy, short-loop, direct, and the biological recovery of LIB materials. Furthermore, anode, lithium, electrolyte, binder and plastics recovery are considered in order to maximise the proportion of materials recovered, minimise waste and point the way towards zero-waste recycling. The life-cycle implications of a circular economy are discussed considering the overall system of LIB recycling, and also directly investigating the different recycling methods. The legal and regulatory perspectives are also considered. Finally, with a view to the future, approaches for next-generation battery chemistries and recycling are evaluated, identifying gaps for research. This review takes the form of a series of short reviews, with each section written independently by a diverse international authorship of experts on the topic. Collectively, these reviews form a comprehensive picture of the current state of the art in LIB recycling, and how these technologies are expected to develop in the future

Roadmap for a sustainable circular economy in lithium-ion and future battery technologies

The market dynamics, and their impact on a future circular economy for lithium-ion batteries (LIB), are presented in this roadmap, with safety as an integral consideration throughout the life cycle. At the point of end-of-life (EOL), there is a range of potential options—remanufacturing, reuse and recycling. Diagnostics play a significant role in evaluating the state-of-health and condition of batteries, and improvements to diagnostic techniques are evaluated. At present, manual disassembly dominates EOL disposal, however, given the volumes of future batteries that are to be anticipated, automated approaches to the dismantling of EOL battery packs will be key. The first stage in recycling after the removal of the cells is the initial cell-breaking or opening step. Approaches to this are reviewed, contrasting shredding and cell disassembly as two alternative approaches. Design for recycling is one approach that could assist in easier disassembly of cells, and new approaches to cell design that could enable the circular economy of LIBs are reviewed. After disassembly, subsequent separation of the black mass is performed before further concentration of components. There are a plethora of alternative approaches for recovering materials; this roadmap sets out the future directions for a range of approaches including pyrometallurgy, hydrometallurgy, short-loop, direct, and the biological recovery of LIB materials. Furthermore, anode, lithium, electrolyte, binder and plastics recovery are considered in order to maximise the proportion of materials recovered, minimise waste and point the way towards zero-waste recycling. The life-cycle implications of a circular economy are discussed considering the overall system of LIB recycling, and also directly investigating the different recycling methods. The legal and regulatory perspectives are also considered. Finally, with a view to the future, approaches for next-generation battery chemistries and recycling are evaluated, identifying gaps for research. This review takes the form of a series of short reviews, with each section written independently by a diverse international authorship of experts on the topic. Collectively, these reviews form a comprehensive picture of the current state of the art in LIB recycling, and how these technologies are expected to develop in the future.</p

Roadmap for a sustainable circular economy in lithium-ion and future battery technologies

The market dynamics, and their impact on a future circular economy for lithium-ion batteries (LIB), are presented in this roadmap, with safety as an integral consideration throughout the life cycle. At the point of end-of-life (EOL), there is a range of potential options—remanufacturing, reuse and recycling. Diagnostics play a significant role in evaluating the state-of-health and condition of batteries, and improvements to diagnostic techniques are evaluated. At present, manual disassembly dominates EOL disposal, however, given the volumes of future batteries that are to be anticipated, automated approaches to the dismantling of EOL battery packs will be key. The first stage in recycling after the removal of the cells is the initial cell-breaking or opening step. Approaches to this are reviewed, contrasting shredding and cell disassembly as two alternative approaches. Design for recycling is one approach that could assist in easier disassembly of cells, and new approaches to cell design that could enable the circular economy of LIBs are reviewed. After disassembly, subsequent separation of the black mass is performed before further concentration of components. There are a plethora of alternative approaches for recovering materials; this roadmap sets out the future directions for a range of approaches including pyrometallurgy, hydrometallurgy, short-loop, direct, and the biological recovery of LIB materials. Furthermore, anode, lithium, electrolyte, binder and plastics recovery are considered in order to maximise the proportion of materials recovered, minimise waste and point the way towards zero-waste recycling. The life-cycle implications of a circular economy are discussed considering the overall system of LIB recycling, and also directly investigating the different recycling methods. The legal and regulatory perspectives are also considered. Finally, with a view to the future, approaches for next-generation battery chemistries and recycling are evaluated, identifying gaps for research. This review takes the form of a series of short reviews, with each section written independently by a diverse international authorship of experts on the topic. Collectively, these reviews form a comprehensive picture of the current state of the art in LIB recycling, and how these technologies are expected to develop in the future

Roadmap for a sustainable circular economy in lithium-ion and future battery technologies

The market dynamics, and their impact on a future circular economy for lithium-ion batteries (LIB), are presented in this roadmap, with safety as an integral consideration throughout the life cycle. At the point of end-of-life (EOL), there is a range of potential options—remanufacturing, reuse and recycling. Diagnostics play a significant role in evaluating the state-of-health and condition of batteries, and improvements to diagnostic techniques are evaluated. At present, manual disassembly dominates EOL disposal, however, given the volumes of future batteries that are to be anticipated, automated approaches to the dismantling of EOL battery packs will be key. The first stage in recycling after the removal of the cells is the initial cell-breaking or opening step. Approaches to this are reviewed, contrasting shredding and cell disassembly as two alternative approaches. Design for recycling is one approach that could assist in easier disassembly of cells, and new approaches to cell design that could enable the circular economy of LIBs are reviewed. After disassembly, subsequent separation of the black mass is performed before further concentration of components. There are a plethora of alternative approaches for recovering materials; this roadmap sets out the future directions for a range of approaches including pyrometallurgy, hydrometallurgy, short-loop, direct, and the biological recovery of LIB materials. Furthermore, anode, lithium, electrolyte, binder and plastics recovery are considered in order to maximise the proportion of materials recovered, minimise waste and point the way towards zero-waste recycling. The life-cycle implications of a circular economy are discussed considering the overall system of LIB recycling, and also directly investigating the different recycling methods. The legal and regulatory perspectives are also considered. Finally, with a view to the future, approaches for next-generation battery chemistries and recycling are evaluated, identifying gaps for research. This review takes the form of a series of short reviews, with each section written independently by a diverse international authorship of experts on the topic. Collectively, these reviews form a comprehensive picture of the current state of the art in LIB recycling, and how these technologies are expected to develop in the future.</p