...
首页> 外文期刊>Health expectations: an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy >“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
【24h】

“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

机译:“把人们负责自己的健康和照顾?” 使用元叙事审查和在线性健康服务的示例,以重新思考电子健康和机构之间的关系

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Abstract Introduction Policy 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. Methods Drawing 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. Results We 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.
机译:摘要介绍政策讨论,通过临床环境外,获得代理商的电子卫生服务的知情和活动用户的参考思路。在本文中,我们的目标是通过从多个学科的“思考”材料来解决这一协会,以产生更高的秩序见解,以告知服务发展,研究和政策。方法绘制元叙事审查方法,我们使用专家咨询的迭代过程收集了多学科的观点,以识别精髓纸张引用映射,综合和同行评审。结果我们确定了社会学,哲学,卫生服务研究,公共卫生,社会运动和计算机研究研究的六种相关范例。将这些范例共同阐明了在该领域共存的对比宣传论和本体论帧,包括电子健康技术的竞争概念化,如:中性工具,用于服务交付,复杂和不可预测的临床互动中的调解员,以及他们自己的代理商。讨论需要电子卫生政策来承认许多人和非人类行动者,他们之间的模糊边界以及构成与电子医疗保健的接触的不可预测和不断发展的互动。建立的电子卫生服务发展模型和政策制定不适用于这种景观。询问电子健康,一般来说,无论是“增加”或“减少”代理商,都没有任何东西可以获得。 E-Health的相当特定类型和方面具有不同的效果,并且可以同时启动和丢弃,并由不同定位和资源的演员进行差异化。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号