Literature DB >> 33533722

Income-Generating Processes of Free Web-Based Digital Health Tools to Engage Patients: Qualitative Analysis.

Claudia Lai1, Raisa Deber1, Alejandro R Jadad1,2, Aviv Shachak1,3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In recent years, digital tools have become a viable means for patients to address their health and information needs. Governments and health care organizations are offering digital tools such as self-assessment tools, symptom tracking tools, or chatbots. Other sources of digital tools, such as those offered through patient platforms, are available on the internet free of charge. We define patient platforms as health-specific websites that offer tools to anyone with internet access to engage them in their health care process with peer networks to support their learning. Although numerous social media platforms engage users without up-front charges, patient platforms are specific to health. As little is known about their business model, there is a need to understand what else these platforms are trying to achieve beyond supporting patients so that patients can make informed decisions about the benefits and risks of using the digital tools they offer.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to explore what patient platforms are trying to achieve beyond supporting patients and how their digital tools can be used to generate income.
METHODS: Textual and visual data collected from a purposeful selection of 11 patient platforms from September 2013 to August 2014 were analyzed using framework analysis. Data were systematically and rigorously coded and categorized according to key issues and themes by following 5 steps: familiarizing, identifying a thematic framework, indexing, charting, and mapping and interpretation. We used open coding to identify additional concepts not captured in the initial thematic framework. This paper reports on emergent findings on the business models of the platforms and their income-generating processes.
RESULTS: Our analysis revealed that in addition to patients, the platforms support other parties with interests in health and information exchanges. Patient platforms did not charge up-front fees but generated income from other sources, such as advertising, sponsorship, marketing (eg, sending information to users on behalf of sponsors or providing means for sponsors to reach patients directly), supporting other portals, and providing research services.
CONCLUSIONS: This study reports on the mechanisms by which some patient platforms generate income to support their operations, gain profit, or both. Although income-generating processes exist elsewhere on social media platforms in general, they pose unique challenges in the health context because digital tools engage patients in health and information exchanges. This study highlights the need to minimize the potential for unintended consequences that can pose health risks to patients or can lead to increased health expenses. By understanding other interests that patient platforms support, our findings point to important policy implications, such as whether (and how) authorities might protect users from processes that may not always be in their best interests and can potentially incur costs to the health system. ©Claudia Lai, Raisa Deber, Alejandro R Jadad, Aviv Shachak. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (http://www.jmir.org), 03.02.2021.

Entities:  

Keywords:  digital health; eHealth; health information; patient engagement

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33533722      PMCID: PMC7889425          DOI: 10.2196/23654

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Internet Res        ISSN: 1438-8871            Impact factor:   5.428


  26 in total

1.  Direct-to-consumer advertising with interactive internet media: global regulation and public health issues.

Authors:  Bryan A Liang; Timothy Mackey
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2011-02-23       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Tools for Engaging Patients on Patient Platforms: A Classification Framework.

Authors:  Claudia Lai; Alejandro R Jadad; Raisa Deber; Aviv Shachak
Journal:  Stud Health Technol Inform       Date:  2019

3.  Direct-to-Consumer Medical Testing in the Era of Value-Based Care.

Authors:  Kimberly Lovett Rockwell
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2017-06-27       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  The relationships between health anxiety, online health information seeking, and cyberchondria: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ryan D McMullan; David Berle; Sandra Arnáez; Vladan Starcevic
Journal:  J Affect Disord       Date:  2018-11-05       Impact factor: 4.839

5.  Patient-centred healthcare, social media and the internet: the perfect storm?

Authors:  Ronen Rozenblum; David W Bates
Journal:  BMJ Qual Saf       Date:  2013-02-01       Impact factor: 7.035

6.  Dirt cheap and without prescription: how susceptible are young US consumers to purchasing drugs from rogue internet pharmacies?

Authors:  Lana Ivanitskaya; Jodi Brookins-Fisher; Irene O Boyle; Danielle Vibbert; Dmitry Erofeev; Lawrence Fulton
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2010-04-26       Impact factor: 5.428

7.  Sharing health data for better outcomes on PatientsLikeMe.

Authors:  Paul Wicks; Michael Massagli; Jeana Frost; Catherine Brownstein; Sally Okun; Timothy Vaughan; Richard Bradley; James Heywood
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2010-06-14       Impact factor: 5.428

8.  Medicine 2.0: social networking, collaboration, participation, apomediation, and openness.

Authors:  Gunther Eysenbach
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2008-08-25       Impact factor: 5.428

Review 9.  Review of internet health information quality initiatives.

Authors:  A Risk; J Dzenowagis
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2001 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 5.428

10.  How to Fight an Infodemic: The Four Pillars of Infodemic Management.

Authors:  Gunther Eysenbach
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2020-06-29       Impact factor: 5.428

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.