CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 43Health Literacy and Information AccessibilityService and Product InnovationHealth, Technology, Consumer Behavior

Value co‐creation in online healthcare communities: The impact of patients’ reference frames on cure and care

Open access
Van Oerle, Sarah, Lievens, Annouk, Mahr, Dominik·2018·Psychology & Marketing
DOI 10.1002/mar.21111
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The gradual transition of health care toward businesses during the past 50 years has converted passive patients into active customers. In our digital society, patients increasingly use online health communities to satisfy complex needs that healthcare professionals leave unmet, including the creation of cure‐oriented (i.e., functional) and care‐oriented (i.e., emotion) value. This research investigates patients’ reference frames (self versus other) as an information processing mechanism and their impact on value creation in online communities. The analysis of 1,687 online postings of a leading healthcare platform shows that self‐referencing is typical for information obtained through an individualistic, patient–doctor encounter; other‐referencing emerges when patients focus on the needs of their peers. Information gathered through the patient–doctor encounter and processed with a self‐referencing frame accordingly enhances cure‐related value, but limits care‐oriented value co‐creation. Other‐referencing does exactly the opposite: it creates a barrier to cure‐related value, but stimulates care‐related value. A patient's experience with the community largely moderates the impact of both self‐ and other‐referencing on cure‐ and care‐related value. These findings show that online health communities can identify and address unmet patient needs, but healthcare professionals still play a critical role in terms of ensuring information quality in online health communities.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/mar.21111

Cites

73 of 73 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • OHCs provide opportunities for stakeholders such as patients, physicians, caregivers, and health care organizations to access and share health information as well as contribute to the value cocreation process, diminish geographical barriers, and provide informational, social, and emotional support.

    “OHCs provide opportunities for stakeholders such as patients, physicians, caregivers, and health care organizations to access and share health information as well as contribute to the value cocreation process, diminish geographical barriers, and provide informational, social, and emotional support [38,39].”

    From Improving the Theoretical Understanding Toward Patient-Driven Health Care Innovation Through Online Value Cocreation: Systematic Review (2020) · cites this paper as [38]

  • OHCs provide opportunities for stakeholders such as patients, physicians, caregivers, and health care organizations to access and share health information, contribute to value cocreation, diminish geographical barriers, and provide informational, social, and emotional support.

    “OHCs provide opportunities for stakeholders such as patients, physicians, caregivers, and health care organizations to access and share health information as well as contribute to the value cocreation process, diminish geographical barriers, and provide informational, social, and emotional support [38,39].”

    From Improving the Theoretical Understanding Toward Patient-Driven Health Care Innovation Through Online Value Cocreation: Systematic Review (2020) · cites this paper as [38]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Berry, L. L., & Bendapudi, N. (2007). Health care: A fertile field for service research. Journal of Service Research, 10(2), 111-122.
  2. Cutler, R. H. (1995). Distributed presence and community in cyberspace. Interpersonal Computing and Technology: An Electronic Journal for the 21st Century, 3(2), 12-32.
  3. Dholakia, U. M., Blazevic, V., Wiertz, C., & Algesheimer, R. (2009). Commu- nal service delivery how customers benefit from participation in firm- hosted virtual P3 communities. Journal of Service Research, 12(2), 208- 226.
  4. Johnson, G. J., & Ambrose, P. J. (2006). Neo-tribes: The power and potential of online communities in health care. Communications of the ACM, 49(1), 107-113.
  5. Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2000). Co-opting customer competence. Havard Business Review, 78(1), 79-87.
  6. Sawhney, M., & Prandelli, E. (2000). Communities of creation. California Management Review, 42(4), 24-54.
  7. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1985). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In J. T. Jost & J. Sidanius (Eds.), Key readings in social psychology (pp. 276-293). New York, NY: Psychology Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Van Oerle, S., Lievens, A., & Mahr, D.
Affiliations
  • Department of Marketing Faculty of Applied Economics University of Antwerp Antwerp Belgium
  • University of Antwerp (BE)
  • Maastricht School of Management (NL)
Corresponding author
Lievens, Annouk
ORCID
Venue
Psychology & Marketing
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-05-23
Volume
35
Issue
9
Pages
629-639
ISSN
  • 0742-6046 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-6793
DOI
10.1002/mar.21111
OpenAlex
W2804204268
Cited by
43
References
71
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1
FWCI
4.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
  • Psychology and Marketing (publishedVersion)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Service and Product Innovation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Health, Technology, Consumer Behavior
Keywords
value co-creation, online health communities, self-reference, care values, patient-physician encounters, peer support, unmet patient needs, information processing, information quality

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review