Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18840866›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Royal Society of Medicine2008

eHealth as a challenge to 'expert' power: a focus group study of internet use for health information and management.

Louise S Donnelly, Rachel L Shaw, Olga B A van den Akker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 'I need her to be a doctor': patients' experiences of presenting health information from the internet in GP consultations.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2012
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Louise S DonnellySchool of Life & Health Sciences, Aston University Birmingham, UK. donnells@aston.ac.uk
Rachel L Shaw
Olga B A van den Akker

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo investigate current use of the internet and eHealth amongst adults.

designFocus groups were conducted to explore participants' attitudes to and reasons for health internet use.

main outcome measuresThe focus group data were analysed and interpreted using thematic analysis.

resultsThree superordinate themes exploring eHealth behaviours were identified: decline in expert authority, pervasiveness of health information on the internet and empowerment. Results showed participants enjoyed the immediate benefits of eHealth information and felt empowered by increased knowledge, but they would be reluctant to lose face-to-face consultations with their GP.

conclusionsOur findings illustrate changes in patient identity and a decline in expert authority with ramifications for the practitioner-patient relationship and subsequent implications for health management more generally.

Indexed as

Attitude to HealthInternetPhysician's RoleAdultFemaleFocus GroupsHumansInformation ServicesMalePatient Education as TopicPatient SatisfactionPhysician-Patient Relations

Identifiers

PMID18840866
PMCPMC2587202

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.