Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37635947›Full record

ArticleInternet interventions2023

An experiment on data sharing options designs for eHealth interventions.

Valentina Bartali, Lex van Velsen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Internet interventions, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Valentina BartaliRoessingh Research and Development and University of Twente, Roessinghsbleekweg 33b, 7522 AH Enschede, the Netherlands.
Lex van VelsenRoessingh Research and Development and University of Twente, Roessinghsbleekweg 33b, 7522 AH Enschede, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: With eHealth technology interventions, users' personal health data can be easily shared among different stakeholders. Users should decide with whom they want to share their data. As support, most eHealth technology has data sharing options functionalities. However, there is little research on how to design these visually. In this paper, we took two possible data sharing options designs - data and party perspective - for an existing eHealth technology intervention, and we explored them. Objective: The aim was to find which of the two designs is the best in terms of trust, privacy concerns, ease of use, and information control. Additionally, to investigate how these factors influence each other with also the goal of giving practical advice on designing for privacy. Method: We conducted a between-subjects online design experiment ( Results: Information control scored higher in the data perspective condition ( Conclusions: We concluded that the design of data-sharing options in eHealth technology affects the experience of the user, mostly for trust and ease of use. In the end, we provided several actionable design advices on how to design for privacy.

Indexed as

Design for privacyEase of useeHealth interventionTrustUser-centred design

Identifiers

PMID37635947
PMCPMC10457541

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.