What is eHealth (5): A research agenda for eHealth through stakeholder consultation and policy context review
What is eHealth (5): A research agenda for eHealth through stakeholder consultation and policy context review
复制标题
DOI：
10.2196/jmir.7.5.e54
复制
发表时间：
2005-01-01
影响因子：
7.4
通讯作者：
Williamson, GR
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Jones, R;Rogers, R;Williamson, GR
背景：2003年，英格兰和威尔士的国民医疗服务体系尽管在信息和通信技术方面投入巨大，但尚未制定全国性的研究议程。国民医疗服务体系有三个主要的研发项目：一个是2003年委托开展的服务提供与组织项目，另外两个是并行的“范围界定工作”，以帮助制定研究议程。本文报道其中一个项目。其他人进行了一项并行的文献综述，并在其他地方进行了报道。
目的：目的是探讨利益相关者的关注点并审查相关政策，以便提出建议并绘制电子健康研究的概念图。
方法：有两个并行的部分。在利益相关者咨询方面，代表12个“利益相关者”群体的37名专业人员参加了焦点小组或访谈。通过电子健康“情景”引发讨论，并使用主题内容分析进行分析。随后，三个焦点小组的17名非专业参与者对这些主题进行了讨论并确定了优先级。在政策审查方面，采访了26名政策制定者，并审查了95份政策文件。随后在一次会议研讨会上对建议进行了审查。将两个部分的研究建议合并到一个概念图中。
结果：利益相关者咨询和政策审查的主题合并为六个标题下的43条建议。其中四个标题（使用、处理、共享和控制信息）描述了电子健康研究的范围。另外两个与应如何开展研究（确保首先确定并传播最佳实践）以及利益相关者认为重要的价值观（特别是衡量健康改善情况）有关。
结论：本研究从经验上得出的电子健康研究范围（使用、处理、共享、控制信息）与信息学的“教科书”描述相符。利益相关者希望电子健康研究包括健康改善或生活质量提高等结果，但此类研究可能是长期的，而信息技术的变化很快。长期研究问题需要关注人类行为以及我们对信息的使用，而不是特定的技术。在某些情况下，对长期成本和收益（就健康而言）进行“建模”可能是可取的。
Background: In 2003, the National Health Service in England and Wales, despite its large investment in information and communication technology, had not set a national research agenda. The National Health Service has three main research and development programs: one is the Service Delivery and Organisation program, commissioned in 2003, and the others are two parallel "scoping exercises" to help set a research agenda. This paper reports on one of those projects. A parallel literature review was carried out by others and has been reported elsewhere.Objective: The objective was to explore the concerns of stakeholders and to review relevant policy in order to produce recommendations and a conceptual map of eHealth research.Methods: There were two parallel strands. For the stakeholder consultation, 37 professionals representing 12 "stakeholder" groups participated in focus groups or interviews. Discussion was prompted by eHealth "scenarios" and analyzed using thematic content analysis. Subsequently, 17 lay participants, in three focus groups, discussed and prioritized these themes. For the policy review, 26 policy makers were interviewed, and 95 policy documents were reviewed. Recommendations were subsequently reviewed in a conference workshop. Recommendations for research from both strands were combined into a conceptual map.Results: Themes from stakeholder consultation and policy review were combined as 43 recommendations under six headings. Four of these headings (using, processing, sharing, and controlling information) describe the scope of eHealth research. The other two relate to how research should be carried out (ensuring best practice is first identified and disseminated) and to the values considered important by stakeholders (in particular, measuring improvement in health).Conclusions: The scope of eHealth research (using, processing, sharing, controlling information) derived empirically from this study corresponds with "textbook" descriptions of informatics. Stakeholders would like eHealth research to include outcomes such as improved health or quality of life, but such research may be long term while changes in information technology are rapid. Longer-term research questions need to be concerned with human behavior and our use of information, rather than particular technologies. In some cases, "modelling" longer-term costs and benefits (in terms of health) may be desirable.