ReviewHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2019
"Putting people in charge of their own health and care?" Using meta-narrative review and the example of online sexual health services to re-think relationships between e-health and agency.
Review in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Staying Connected? Revaluing 'Relationship Goods' in Digital Health Ecologies.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2026Article
- Contraception in Person-Contraception Online (CiP-CO) cohort study.BMJ sexual & reproductive health · 2022Article
- Article
- Two-Way Text Messaging to Support Self-Care and Delivery of an Online Sexual Health Service: Mixed Methods Evaluation.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2020Article
- "Putting people in charge of their own health and care?" Using meta-narrative review and the example of online sexual health services to re-think relationships between e-health and agency.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
introductionPolicy discussions reference ideas of informed and active users of e-health services who gain agency through self-management, choice and care delivered outside clinical settings. In this article, we aim to problematize this association by "thinking with" material from multiple disciplines to generate higher order insights to inform service development, research and policy.
methodsDrawing on meta-narrative review methods, we gathered perspectives from multiple disciplines using an iterative process of expert consultation to identify seminal papers citation mapping, synthesis and peer review.
resultsWe identify six relevant paradigms from sociology, philosophy, health services research, public health, the study of social movements and computer studies. Bringing these paradigms together illuminates the contrasting epistemological and ontological framings that co-exist in this area, including competing conceptualizations of e-health technologies as: neutral tools for service delivery, mediators within complex and unpredictable clinical interactions and as agents in their own right. DISCUSSION: There is a need for e-health policy to recognize many human and non-human actors, the blurred boundaries between them and the unpredictable and evolving interactions that constitute engagement with e-health care. Established models for e-health service development and policy making are not designed for this landscape. There is nothing to be gained by asking whether e-health, in general, either "increases" or "decreases" agency. Rather specific types and aspects of e-health have diverse effects and can be simultaneously enabling and disempowering, and be differentially experienced by differently positioned and resourced actors.
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.