ArticleJMIR medical informatics2016
Use and Uptake of eHealth in General Practice: A Cross-Sectional Survey and Focus Group Study Among Health Care Users and General Practitioners.
Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
48 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 90 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Impact of Digitalization on European General Practice From the Perspective of General Practitioners: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Utilisation of Electronic Health Records for Public Health in Asia: A Review of Success Factors and Potential Challenges.BioMed research international · 2019Pooled it
- Recommendations of digital health applications to patients by Portuguese General Practitioners: a cross-sectional study.The European journal of general practice · 2025Article
- From scepticism to integration: adoption of mobile health apps in Danish chiropractic practice-a mixed methods study.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2025Article
- Involving consumers in health research through the use of consumer panels: a scoping review.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Review
- Development of a Web-Based Intervention to Support Primary Health Care Professionals in Digital Health Measurement: User-Centered Participatory Approach.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- The Motivations of Citizens to Attend an eHealth Course in the Public Library: Qualitative Interview Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Exploring effective patient feedback methods for eHealth in general practice.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- Exploring How Patients Are Supported to Use Online Services in Primary Care in England Through "Digital Facilitation": Survey Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Investigating Patient Use and Experience of Online Appointment Booking in Primary Care: Mixed Methods Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Two years of approved digital health applications in Germany - Perspectives and experiences of general practitioners with an affinity for their use.The European journal of general practice · 2023Article
- Development of an electronic medical records project for Al-Razi hospital in Palestine.Journal of public health research · 2023Article
- Patient Portals as Facilitators of Engagement in Patients With Diabetes and Chronic Heart Disease: Scoping Review of Usage and Usability.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Mapping Factors That Affect the Uptake of Digital Therapeutics Within Health Systems: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- The Usability of Homelab, a Digital Self-service at a Dutch General Practice, for Diagnostic Tests: Pilot Study With a Questionnaire.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- A discrete choice experiment to examine the factors influencing consumers' willingness to purchase health apps.mHealth · 2023Article
- Assessing knowledge, attitude, and readiness to use e-health among doctors in a tertiary health care unit in Bhubaneswar city, Odisha - A cross-sectional survey.Journal of education and health promotion · 2023Article
- Teleconsultation adoption since COVID-19: Comparison of barriers and facilitators in primary care settings in Hong Kong and the Netherlands.Health policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2022Review
- Personas for Better Targeted eHealth Technologies: User-Centered Design Approach.JMIR human factors · 2022Article
- Willingness of French General Practitioners to Prescribe mHealth Apps and Devices: Quantitative Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPolicy makers promote the use of eHealth to widen access to health care services and to improve the quality and safety of care. Nevertheless, the enthusiasm among policy makers for eHealth does not match its uptake and use. eHealth is defined in this study as "health services delivered or enhanced through the Internet and related information and communication technologies."
objectiveThe objective of this study was to investigate (1) the current use of eHealth in the Netherlands by general practitioners (GPs) and health care users, (2) the future plans of GPs to provide eHealth and the willingness of health care users to use eHealth services, and (3) the perceived positive effects and barriers from the perspective of GPs and health care users.
methodsA cross-sectional survey of a sample of Dutch GPs and members of the Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel was conducted in April 2014. A pre-structured questionnaire was completed by 171 GPs (12% response) and by 754 health care users (50% response). In addition, two focus groups were conducted in June 2014: one group with GPs (8 participants) and one with health care users (10 participants).
resultsThree-quarters of Dutch GPs that responded to the questionnaire (67.3%, 115/171) offered patients the possibility of requesting a prescription via the Internet, and half of them offered patients the possibility of asking a question via the Internet (49.1%, 84/171). In general, they did intend to provide future eHealth services. Nonetheless, many of the GPs perceived barriers, especially concerning its innovation (eg, insufficient reliable, secure systems) and the sociopolitical context (eg, lack of financial compensation for the time spent on implementation). By contrast, health care users were generally not aware of existing eHealth services offered by their GPs. Nevertheless, half of them were willing to use eHealth services when offered by their GP. In general, health care users have positive attitudes regarding eHealth. One in five (20.6%, 148/718) health care users perceived barriers to the use of eHealth. These included concerns about the safety of health information obtained via the Internet (66.7%, 96/144) and privacy aspects (55.6%, 80/144).
conclusionsGPs and health care users have generally positive attitudes towards eHealth, which is a prerequisite for the uptake of eHealth. But, general practitioners in particular perceive barriers to using eHealth and consider the implementation of eHealth to be complex. This study shows that there is room for improving awareness of eHealth services in primary care. It will take some time before these issues are resolved and eHealth can be fully adopted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.