Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42709384›Full record

ArticleHealth care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy2026

Staying Connected? Revaluing 'Relationship Goods' in Digital Health Ecologies.

Alan Cribb, Vikki Entwistle

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy, 2026. 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.

Alan CribbCentre for Public Policy Research, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Vikki EntwistleUniversity of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom. vikki.entwistle@abdn.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As the use of digital information technologies has grown and transformed health care practices and ecologies, concerns have been raised about the implications for health care relationships. But it is no simple matter to pin down what makes health care relationships good and valuable, nor to assess whether and how digitalisation changes this. 'Relationship goods' such as care, compassion and respect are conceptually and practically complex. Longstanding models based on assumptions of dyadic relationships between individual health care practitioners and patients are no longer fully fit for purpose. This paper makes a case for re-thinking health care relationships to reflect the ongoing shift to digital health care ecologies. It outlines some of the key questions and considerations that will need to be addressed to support more rigorous evaluations of the implications of digital technologies and to better guide future design and health care improvement work. It illustrates some of the resources that exist within contemporary philosophy and ethics to support this agenda and calls for collaborative interdisciplinary working to investigate and help preserve the value of health care relationships through ongoing change.

Indexed as

DesignDigital technologiesEthicsEvaluationHealthcare relationships

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.