Purpose– The purpose of this paper is to create a conceptual framework, based on a structured literature review, to analyze the digital disability divide and help find solutions for it. A digital disability divide exists between people with impairments and those without impairments. Multiple studies have shown that people without impairments are less likely to own a computer or have an Internet connection than are people with impairments. However, the digital disability divide is seen in relation not only to access (...) but also to accessibility and use. For people with impairments, new technological innovations offer solutions for everyday challenges, such as finding information, communicating with others and using electronic services.Design/methodology/approach– For this study, 4,778 conference and journal publications were systematically analyzed.Findings– A number of key findings emerged. This field is relatively new, and the literature is highly focused on the technological and social aspects of the digital disability divide, with technology and societal attributes being the core sub-attributes for a comprehensive model. The previous literature did not significantly study the consequences of the financial situation of individuals; rather, the predominant focus was on the have-nots and countries with low income potentials. Furthermore, motivation reveals a compelling case within the digital disability divide subset.Originality/value– The review provides a consolidated view of past research on the general topic of the digital disability divide and the attributes that affect it. (shrink)

Although mutually advantageous cooperative strategies might be an apt account of some societies, other moral systems might be needed among certain groups and contexts. In particular, in a duty-based moral system, people do not behave morally with an expectation for proportional reward, but rather, as a fulfillment of debt owed to others. In such systems, mutualistic motivations are not necessarily a key component of morality.

Background: Brain-dead humans retain many of the physiologic functions of living humans, but they are legally dead and cannot be physically harmed by participation in research. Stakeholder opinions...

As the number of infections and mortalities from the SARS‐CoV‐2 pandemic continues to rise, the development of an effective therapy against COVID‐19 becomes ever more urgent. A few reports showing a positive correlation between BCG vaccination and reduced COVID‐19 mortality have ushered in some hope. BCG has been suggested to confer a broad level of nonspecific protection against several pathogens, mainly via eliciting “trained immunity” in innate immune cells. Secondly, BCG has also been proven to provide benefits in autoimmune diseases (...) by inducing tolerogenicity. Being an acute inflammatory disease, COVID‐19 requires a therapy that induces early priming of anti‐viral immune responses and regulates aberrant hyperactivity of innate‐immune cells. Here, we hypothesize that BCG can offer reliable spatiotemporal protection from COVID‐19 by triggering trained immunity and tolerogenesis, through multiple cellular pathways. We propose further research on BCG‐mediated immunoprotection, especially in vulnerable individuals, as a strategy to halt the progress of the SARS‐CoV‐2 pandemic. Also see the video abstract here https://youtu.be/P2D2RXfq6Vg. (shrink)