Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36787885›Full record

ArticleMethods of information in medicine2023

Defining and Scoping Participatory Health Informatics: An eDelphi Study.

Kerstin Denecke, Octavio Rivera Romero, Carolyn Petersen, Marge Benham-Hutchins, Miguel Cabrer, Shauna Davies, Rebecca Grainger, Rada Hussein, Guillermo Lopez-Campos, Fernando Martin-Sanchez and 8 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Methods of information in medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

18 authors.

Kerstin DeneckeBern University of Applied Sciences, Department Engineering and Computer Science, Institute for Medical Informatics, Bern, Switzerland.
Octavio Rivera RomeroInstituto de Ingeniería Informática (I3US), Universidad de Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain.
Carolyn PetersenMayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, United States.
Marge Benham-HutchinsCollege of Nursing and Health Sciences, Texas A&M University Corpus Christi, Texas, Corpus Christi, United States.
Miguel CabrereHealth Expert and Idonia Founder, Mallorca, Spain.
Shauna DaviesFaculty of Nursing, University of Regina, Regina, SK, Canada.
Rebecca GraingerDepartment of Medicine, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand.
Rada HusseinLudwig Boltzmann Institute for Digital Health and Prevention, Salzburg, Austria.
Guillermo Lopez-CamposWellcome-Wolfson Institute for Experimental Medicine, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, United Kingdom.
Fernando Martin-SanchezDigital Health Programme, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain.
Mollie McKillopIBM Corporation, New York, United States.
Mark MerolliDepartment of Physiotherapy, School of Health Sciences, the University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Talya Miron-ShatzFaculty of Business Administration, Ono Academic College, Kiryat Ono, Israel.
Jesús Daniel TrigoDepartment of Electrical, Electronic and Communications Engineering, Public University of Navarra, Institute of Smart Cities (ISC), Navarra Institute for Health Research (IdiSNA), Pamplona, Spain.
Graham WrightDepartment of Information Systems, Rhodes University, Grahamstown, South Africa.
Rolf WynnDepartment of Clinical Medicine, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.
Carol Hullin Lucay CossioData Governance Manager, Victoria Legal Aid, Melbourne, Australia.
Elia GabarronNorwegian Centre for E-health Research, University Hospital of North Norway, Tromsø, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth care has evolved to support the involvement of individuals in decision making by, for example, using mobile apps and wearables that may help empower people to actively participate in their treatment and health monitoring. While the term "participatory health informatics" (PHI) has emerged in literature to describe these activities, along with the use of social media for health purposes, the scope of the research field of PHI is not yet well defined.

objectiveThis article proposes a preliminary definition of PHI and defines the scope of the field.

methodsWe used an adapted Delphi study design to gain consensus from participants on a definition developed from a previous review of literature. From the literature we derived a set of attributes describing PHI as comprising 18 characteristics, 14 aims, and 4 relations. We invited researchers, health professionals, and health informaticians to score these characteristics and aims of PHI and their relations to other fields over three survey rounds. In the first round participants were able to offer additional attributes for voting.

resultsThe first round had 44 participants, with 28 participants participating in all three rounds. These 28 participants were gender-balanced and comprised participants from industry, academia, and health sectors from all continents. Consensus was reached on 16 characteristics, 9 aims, and 6 related fields. DISCUSSION: The consensus reached on attributes of PHI describe PHI as a multidisciplinary field that uses information technology and delivers tools with a focus on individual-centered care. It studies various effects of the use of such tools and technology. Its aims address the individuals in the role of patients, but also the health of a society as a whole. There are relationships to the fields of health informatics, digital health, medical informatics, and consumer health informatics.

conclusionWe have proposed a preliminary definition, aims, and relationships of PHI based on literature and expert consensus. These can begin to be used to support development of research priorities and outcomes measurements.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareMedical InformaticsConsensusDelphi TechniqueHumansSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID36787885
PMCPMC10462430

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.