Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30898816›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

Opinion leader empowered patients about the era of digital health: a qualitative study.

Bertalan Meskó, Nóra Radó, Zsuzsa Győrffy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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.

Bertalan MeskóThe Medical Futurist Institute, Budapest, Hungary.
Nóra RadóThe Medical Futurist Institute, Budapest, Hungary.
Zsuzsa GyőrffyThe Medical Futurist Institute, Budapest, Hungary.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesWe aimed to explore the opinion leader empowered patients' relationship with their medical professionals, their experiences and beliefs about technologies, and how they see the future. We also attempted to determine whether technologies, the access to it or patient empowerment are the main driving forces behind these changes.

designA qualitative interview study analysed with interpretative phenomenological analysis.

settingAll interviews were conducted and recorded individually with the same trained interviewer via a Skype call.

participantsThe study is based on qualitative, semistructured interviews with 11 opinion leader empowered patients from six countries including UK, USA, Australia, Sweden, South Africa and Ireland.

resultsWe identified four superordinate themes emerging from e-patients' experiences: (1) impact of technology, (2) the meaning of empowerment, (3) the changing physician-patient relationship and (4) expectations for the future. The relationship e-patients have with their physicians is based on efficient communication, proactivity, the desire for asking questions and the use of technologies. The interviews have shown that the rapid development of technology has fundamentally changed the lives of these e-patients, and technology eventually is transforming the physician-patient relationship into a partnership. Regarding the future of the physician-patient partnership, e-patients emphasised that change will rather be cultural than technological.

conclusionsThe interviews have shown that cooperation between technology and healthcare is not enough on its own: the most decisive factor is the return of the human touch and reciprocal communication. All of these suggest that technology is an important ally in the 'renaissance of medicine' that starts to treat patients as it should have always had.

Indexed as

Physician-Patient RelationsAdultAustraliaFemaleHealth CommunicationHealth PromotionHumansIrelandLeadershipMalePatient Education as TopicPatient ParticipationQualitative ResearchSouth AfricaSwedenUnited Kingdomdigital healthempowered patientempowermentinformation technologysocial medicine

Identifiers

PMID30898816
PMCPMC6475254

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.