Cited by 249Telemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationHealth Literacy and Information AccessibilityHealthcare Systems and Technology

The diffusion of virtual communities in health care: Concepts and challenges

Demiris, George·2006·Patient Education and Counseling

Abstract

Objective This paper providers an overview and discussion of virtual communities in health care. Furthermore, we aim to discuss in this context ethical, legal and technical considerations and the current status of research in this domain.Methods We searched medical and social science literature including survey studies, randomized and non-randomized controlled interventions and reviews.Results The literature indicates that a virtual community in health care as a group of people using telecommunication with the purposes of delivering health care and education, and/or providing support, covers a wide range of clinical specialties, technologies and stakeholders. Examples include peer-to-peer networks, virtual health care delivery and research teams. Ethical challenges including the concepts of identity and deception, privacy and confidentiality and technical issues, such as sociability and usability are discussed.Conclusion Virtual communities may empower patients and enhance coordination of care services; however, there is not sufficient systematic evidence of the effectiveness of virtual communities on clinical outcomes or patient empowerment. Researchers need to address issues, such as sample sizes and experimental design to further the research field in this domain.Practice implications When practitioners utilize virtual community tools to communicate with patients or colleagues they have to maximize sociability and usability of this mode of communication, while addressing concerns for privacy and the fear of de-humanizing practice, and the lack of clarity or relevance of current legislative frameworks.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.pec.2005.10.003

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 42 · Cited by 249

Authors
Demiris, G.
Affiliations
University of Missouri (US)
Corresponding author
Demiris, George
Venue
Patient Education and Counseling
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-08
Volume
62
Issue
2
Pages
178-188
ISSN
0738-3991 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2120803554
Cited by
249
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 14
FWCI
1.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Patient Education and Counseling (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Healthcare Systems and Technology
Keywords
online communities, health care, telemedicine, peer-to-peer networks, patient empowerment, privacy and confidentiality, sociability, usability, ethics, legal issues, care coordination, online health support
MeSH terms
Attitude of Health Personnel, Attitude to Computers, Attitude to Health, Communication, Confidentiality, Delivery of Health Care, Diffusion of Innovation, Health Services Accessibility, Health Services Needs and Demand, Health Services Research, Humans, Interprofessional Relations, Malpractice, Peer Group, Professional-Patient Relations, Research Design, Social Support, Technology Assessment, Biomedical, User-Computer Interface, Liability, Legal, Computer Security, Telemedicine, Internet

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