Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27829413›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2016

Feasibility of digital footprint data for health analytics and services: an explorative pilot study.

Marja Harjumaa, Saila Saraniemi, Saara Pekkarinen, Minna Lappi, Heidi Similä, Minna Isomursu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Digital Transformation in Healthcare: Technology Acceptance and Its Applications.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

6 authors.

Marja HarjumaaVTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, P.O.BOX 1100, 90571, Oulu, Finland. marja.harjumaa@vtt.fi.ORCID 0000-0002-5919-5709
Saila SaraniemiOulu Business School, University of Oulu, P.O. BOX 4600, 90014, Oulu, Finland.
Saara PekkarinenOulu Business School, University of Oulu, P.O. BOX 4600, 90014, Oulu, Finland.
Minna LappiOulu Business School, University of Oulu, P.O. BOX 4600, 90014, Oulu, Finland.
Heidi SimiläVTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, P.O.BOX 1100, 90571, Oulu, Finland.
Minna IsomursuInformation Technology and Electrical Engineering, University of Oulu, P.O. BOX 3000, 90014, Oulu, Finland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs a result of digitalization, data is available about almost every aspect of our lives. Personal data collected by individuals themselves or stored by organizations interacting with people is known as a digital footprint. The purpose of this study was to identify prerequisites for collecting and using digital data that could be valuable for health data analytics and new health services.

methodsResearchers and their contacts involved in a nationwide research project focusing on digital health in Finland were asked to participate in a pilot study on collecting their own personal data from various organizations of their own choice, such as retail chains, banks, insurance companies, and healthcare providers. After the pilot, a qualitative inquiry was adopted to collect semi-structured interview data from twelve active participants in the pilot. Interviews comprised themes such as the experiences of collecting personal data, as well as the usefulness of the data in general and for the participants themselves. Interview data was then analyzed thematically.

resultsEven if the participants had an academic background and were highly motivated to collect and use their data, they faced many challenges, such as quite long delays in the provision of the data, and the unresponsiveness of some organizations. Regarding the usefulness of the acquired personal data, our results show that participants had high expectations, but they were disappointed with the small amount of data and its irrelevant content. For the most part, the data was not in a format that would be useful for health data analytics and new health services. Participants also found that there were actual mistakes in their health data reports.

conclusionsThe study revealed that collecting and using digital footprint data, even by knowledgeable individuals, is not an easy task. As the usefulness of the acquired personal health data mainly depended on its form and usability for services or solutions relevant to an individual, rather than on the data being valuable as such, more emphasis should be placed on providing the data in a reusable form.

Indexed as

AdultData CollectionFeasibility StudiesFemaleFinlandHumansMalePilot ProjectsSelf CareTelemedicineDigital footprinteHealthExpectationsExperiencesMy dataQualitative inquirySelf-care

Identifiers

PMID27829413
PMCPMC5112682

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.