BackgroundDespite rapid growth in eHealth research, there remains a lack of consistency in defining and using terms related to eHealth. More widely cited definitions provide broad understanding of eHealth but lack sufficient conceptual clarity to operationalize eHealth and enable its implementation in health care practice, research, education, and policy. Definitions that are more detailed are often context or discipline specific, limiting ease of translation of these definitions across the breadth of eHealth perspectives and situations. A conceptual model of eHealth that adequately captures its complexity and potential overlaps is required. This model must also be sufficiently detailed to enable eHealth operationalization and hypothesis testing.ObjectiveThis study aimed to develop a conceptual practice-based model of eHealth to support health professionals in applying eHealth to their particular professional or discipline contexts.MethodsWe conducted semistructured interviews with key informants (N=25) from organizations involved in health care delivery, research, education, practice, governance, and policy to explore their perspectives on and experiences with eHealth. We used purposeful sampling for maximum diversity. Interviews were coded and thematically analyzed for emergent domains.ResultsThematic analyses revealed 3 prominent but overlapping domains of eHealth: (1) health in our hands (using eHealth technologies to monitor, track, and inform health), (2) interacting for health (using digital technologies to enable health communication among practitioners and between health professionals and clients or patients), and (3) data enabling health (collecting, managing, and using health data). These domains formed a model of eHealth that addresses the need for clear definitions and a taxonomy of eHealth while acknowledging the fluidity of this area and the strengths of initiatives that span multiple eHealth domains.ConclusionsThis model extends current understanding of eHealth by providing clearly defined domains of eHealth while highlighting the benefits of using digital technologies in ways that cross several domains. It provides the depth of perspectives and examples of eHealth use that are lacking in previous research. On the basis of this model, we suggest that eHealth initiatives that are most impactful would include elements from all 3 domains.
BackgroundThe demand for an eHealth-ready and adaptable workforce is placing increasing pressure on universities to deliver eHealth education. At present, eHealth education is largely focused on components of eHealth rather than considering a curriculum-wide approach.ObjectiveThis study aimed to develop a framework that could be used to guide health curriculum design based on current evidence, and stakeholder perceptions of eHealth capabilities expected of tertiary health graduates.MethodsA 3-phase, mixed-methods approach incorporated the results of a literature review, focus groups, and a Delphi process to develop a framework of eHealth capability statements.ResultsParticipants (N=39) with expertise or experience in eHealth education, practice, or policy provided feedback on the proposed framework, and following the fourth iteration of this process, consensus was achieved. The final framework consisted of 4 higher-level capability statements that describe the learning outcomes expected of university graduates across the domains of (1) digital health technologies, systems, and policies; (2) clinical practice; (3) data analysis and knowledge creation; and (4) technology implementation and codesign. Across the capability statements are 40 performance cues that provide examples of how these capabilities might be demonstrated.ConclusionsThe results of this study inform a cross-faculty eHealth curriculum that aligns with workforce expectations. There is a need for educational curriculum to reinforce existing eHealth capabilities, adapt existing capabilities to make them transferable to novel eHealth contexts, and introduce new learning opportunities for interactions with technologies within education and practice encounters. As such, the capability framework developed may assist in the application of eHealth by emerging and existing health care professionals. Future research needs to explore the potential for integration of findings into workforce development programs.
Background Virtual reality (VR) technology has been explored in the health sector as a novel tool for supporting treatment side effects, including managing pain and anxiety. VR has recently become more available with the launch of low-cost devices and apps. Objective This study aimed to provide an updated review of the research into VR use for pain and anxiety in pediatric patients undergoing medical procedures. Methods We performed a scoping review. To identify relevant studies, we searched three electronic databases. Two authors screened the titles and abstracts for relevance and eligibility criteria. Results Overall, 1386 articles were identified. In total, 18 articles were included in the review. Articles were published in English between 2013 and 2018. Our review determined that VR technology was being administered in a range of situations to modulate acute and chronic pain or anxiety, needle phobia, and procedural care in children and adolescents. We identified 9 articles that designed the bespoke VR apps. The findings were analyzed to develop a holistic model and describe the product, experience, and intervention aspects that need to be considered in designing such medical VR apps. Conclusions VR has been demonstrated to be effective for managing pain and anxiety in a variety of populations. However, design strategies are limited beyond distraction techniques. We propose future VR interventions to explore skill-building goals in apps characterized by dynamic feedback to the patient and experiential and product qualities that enable them to be active participants in managing their own care. To achieve this, design must be part of the development.
Background Higher education attainment is linked to improved health and employment outcomes but the impact of university students’ experiences of menstruation on their education is less clear. The objective of this review was to synthesise qualitative and quantitative research on university students’ menstrual experiences and educational impacts. Methods Eligible studies were identified through systematic searching across eight peer-reviewed databases, websites for menstrual health organisations, grey literature databases, and reference lists of included studies. Eligible studies must have reported on at least one of the antecedents or components of menstrual experience outlined in the integrated model of menstrual experience in relation to university students or reported on the impact of their menstrual experiences on their education. Study characteristics and findings were extracted, analysed and presented as a narrative synthesis. The quality of evidence was assessed with the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. This study is registered on PROSPERO, number CRD42020178470. Results Eighty-three studies were eligible for inclusion. Most studies (n = 74; 89%) were quantitative and the highest proportion of studies were conducted in lower-middle-income countries (n = 31; 37%). Self-reported dysmenorrhea, other physical and emotional menstrual-related symptoms, and menstrual stigma contributed to negative menstrual experiences among female students. Very few studies considered the menstrual experiences of non-binary and transgender menstruating students, and culturally diverse students. Dysmenorrhea contributed to university absenteeism, impaired participation and concentration, and declining academic performance. Inadequate sanitation facilities for menstrual management and challenges containing menstruation also negatively impacted education. Conclusions Female university students’ experiences of menstruation can negatively impact their education, highlighting the need for program and policy responses at university to improve students’ wellbeing and educational engagement. Further research on the menstrual experiences of gender diverse, migrant and international students is needed as there is insufficient evidence to date.
This review aimed to identify research that described how eHealth facilitates interdisciplinary cancer care and to understand the ways in which eHealth innovations are being used in this setting. An integrative review of eHealth interventions used for interdisciplinary care for people with cancer was conducted by systematically searching research databases in March 2015, and repeated in September 2016. Searches resulted in 8531 citations, of which 140 were retrieved and scanned in full, with twenty-six studies included in the review. Analysis of data extracted from the included articles revealed five broad themes: (i) data collection and accessibility; (ii) virtual multidisciplinary teams; (iii) communication between individuals involved in the delivery of health services; (iv) communication pathways between patients and cancer care teams; and (v) health professional-led change. Use of eHealth interventions in cancer care was widespread, particularly to support interdisciplinary care. However, research has focused on development and implementation of interventions, rather than on long-term impact. Further research is warranted to explore design, evaluation, and long-term sustainability of eHealth systems and interventions in interdisciplinary cancer care. Technology evolves quickly and researchers need to provide health professionals with timely guidance on how best to respond to new technologies in the health sector.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.