CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 35Health Literacy and Information AccessibilityPatient-Provider Communication in HealthcareInformation Retrieval and Search Behavior

Information rx: prescribing good consumerism and responsible citizenship

Open access
Adams, Samantha, de Bont, Antoinette·2007·Health Care Analysis
DOI 10.1007/s10728-007-0061-9PMC PMC2045690
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Recent medical informatics and sociological literature has painted the image of a new type of patient--one that is reflexive and informed, with highly specified information needs and perceptions, as well as highly developed skills and tactics for acquiring information. Patients have been re-named "reflexive consumers." At the same time, literature about the questionable reliability of web-based information has suggested the need to create both user tools that have pre-selected information and special guidelines for individuals to use to check the individual characteristics of the information they encounter. In this article, we examine suggestions that individuals must be assisted in developing skills for "reflexive consumerism" and what these particular skills should be. Using two types of data (discursive data from websites and promotional items, and supplementary data from interviews and ethnographic observations carried out with those working to sustain these initiatives), we examine how users are directly addressed and discussed. We argue that these initiatives prescribe skills and practices that extend beyond finding and assessing information on the internet and demonstrate that they include ideals of consumerism and citizenship.

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 · 10.1007/s10728-007-0061-9

Cites

54 of 54 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?

  • Social media allow patient organisations to 'crowdsource' experiential knowledge and to challenge existing medical authority whilst blurring the boundaries between the medical expert and the lay patient.

    “Vicari and Cappai (2016) show how social media allow patient organisations to 'crowdsource' experiential knowledge and to challenge existing medical authority whilst blurring the boundaries between the medical expert and the lay patient (Adams and de Bont, 2007;Barrett et al., 2016;Griffiths et al., 2012).”

    From The Cultivation of Digital Health Citizenship (2021) · cites this paper as Adams and de Bont, 2007

    The Introduction (page not available) says that access to online medical information can break down the boundary between lay people and experts and change patients’ relationships with health professionals. It does not address social media enabling patient organisations to crowdsource experiential knowledge. The Conclusion also notes that the initiatives studied can reinforce the medical expert’s leading role. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

1 of the 55 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [13]Doupi, P. (2005). Personalized patient education and the internet: Linking health information to the electronic patient record. The Netherlands: Erasmus University of Rotterdam, PhD Thesis.
  2. [16]Eng, T. R., & Gustafson, D. H. (Eds.) (1999). Wired for health and well-being. From the science panel on interactive communication and health. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services, US Government Printing Office.
  3. [36]Kivits, J. (2002). Health information on the internet: An investigation of the methodological dilemmas and opportunities offered by e-mail interviewing. Paper presented at the International Conference of the Association of Internet Researchers, IR 3.0: Net/Work/Theory, October, 2002. Maastricht, The Netherlands.
  4. [46]Oudshoorn, N., & Pinch, T. (Eds.) (2003). How users matter. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Adams, S., & de Bont, A.
Affiliations
Erasmus MC (NL)
Corresponding author
Adams, Samantha
ORCID
Adams, Samantha
Venue
Health Care Analysis
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2007-08-17
Volume
15
Issue
4
Pages
273-290
ISSN
  • 1065-3058 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-3394
DOI
10.1007/s10728-007-0061-9
PMC
PMC2045690
OpenAlex
W2146941391
Cited by
35
References
55
Citations by year
2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 5 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 4
FWCI
7.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Health Care Analysis (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
  • RePub (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • World Health Organization
  • U.S. National Library of Medicine
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
Keywords
responsible citizenship, consumerism, information literacy, health information seeking, online health information, information reliability, information skills, health promotion
MeSH terms
Attitude to Computers, Government, Humans, Information Services, Physician-Patient Relations, Internet, Consumer Health Information

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