Telecare at a crossroads? Finding researchable questions

IF 1.7 Q2 REHABILITATION
J. Woolham, P. Freddolino, G. Gibson, Sarah R. Daniels
{"title":"Telecare at a crossroads? Finding researchable questions","authors":"J. Woolham, P. Freddolino, G. Gibson, Sarah R. Daniels","doi":"10.1108/JET-11-2020-0049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis paper aims to report on a structured attempt to develop new directions for research into telecare. Current research evidence suggests that telecare in the UK is not optimally cost-effective and does not deliver better outcomes than more traditional forms of care and support. To address this problem, an analysis of expert opinion about future directions for research is provided.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nTwo electronic surveys of UK based academic experts were conducted. Participants were drawn from a range of professional disciplines, including medicine, social care, occupational therapy and social policy and identified were by their contribution in this, or allied fields. The first survey included nine questions intended to identify at least one new research question that could form the basis of a funding proposal to the Nuffield Foundation, which provided “seedcorn” funding to support this work. Ten themes were identified following thematic analysis. The second survey asked participants to prioritise three of these themes.\n\n\nFindings\nKey themes emerging as priority areas for future research were as follows: the role of assessment in ensuring technology deployment meets the needs of service users; ethical implications of technology and how these might be addressed in the future; and the use of end user co-production/co-creation approaches in the development of new assistive technologies and digital enabled care.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nThe findings are based on academic expert opinion; perspectives of practitioners, service users and family members are unrepresented.\n\n\nPractical implications\nThe findings of this study could contribute to development of new directions for telecare research, and future strategic funding decisions in this rapidly changing field.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nEvidence for sub-optimal outcomes for telecare requires new thinking. The authors are not aware of any other study that offers an analysis of expert opinion of fruitful areas for new research into telecare.\n","PeriodicalId":42168,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Enabling Technologies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Enabling Technologies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/JET-11-2020-0049","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to report on a structured attempt to develop new directions for research into telecare. Current research evidence suggests that telecare in the UK is not optimally cost-effective and does not deliver better outcomes than more traditional forms of care and support. To address this problem, an analysis of expert opinion about future directions for research is provided. Design/methodology/approach Two electronic surveys of UK based academic experts were conducted. Participants were drawn from a range of professional disciplines, including medicine, social care, occupational therapy and social policy and identified were by their contribution in this, or allied fields. The first survey included nine questions intended to identify at least one new research question that could form the basis of a funding proposal to the Nuffield Foundation, which provided “seedcorn” funding to support this work. Ten themes were identified following thematic analysis. The second survey asked participants to prioritise three of these themes. Findings Key themes emerging as priority areas for future research were as follows: the role of assessment in ensuring technology deployment meets the needs of service users; ethical implications of technology and how these might be addressed in the future; and the use of end user co-production/co-creation approaches in the development of new assistive technologies and digital enabled care. Research limitations/implications The findings are based on academic expert opinion; perspectives of practitioners, service users and family members are unrepresented. Practical implications The findings of this study could contribute to development of new directions for telecare research, and future strategic funding decisions in this rapidly changing field. Originality/value Evidence for sub-optimal outcomes for telecare requires new thinking. The authors are not aware of any other study that offers an analysis of expert opinion of fruitful areas for new research into telecare.
十字路口的远程护理?寻找可研究的问题
目的本文旨在报告一种结构化的尝试,为远程医疗的研究开辟新的方向。目前的研究证据表明,在英国,远程医疗并不是最具成本效益的,也没有比传统形式的护理和支持提供更好的结果。针对这一问题,分析了专家对未来研究方向的看法。设计/方法/方法对英国的学术专家进行了两次电子调查。参加者来自一系列专业学科,包括医学、社会护理、职业治疗和社会政策,并根据他们在这一领域或相关领域的贡献加以确定。第一次调查包括9个问题,旨在确定至少一个新的研究问题,这些问题可以构成向纳菲尔德基金会提出资助建议的基础,纳菲尔德基金会为这项工作提供“种子”资金。在专题分析之后确定了十个主题。第二项调查要求参与者优先考虑其中的三个主题。作为未来研究优先领域的主要主题如下:评估在确保技术部署满足服务用户需求方面的作用;技术的伦理影响以及未来如何解决这些问题;以及在开发新的辅助技术和数字化护理时使用终端用户共同生产/共同创造方法。研究的局限性/意义研究结果基于学术专家的意见;从业人员、服务使用者和家庭成员的观点没有得到代表。实际意义本研究的发现有助于发展远程医疗研究的新方向,以及在这个快速变化的领域中未来的战略资助决策。独创性/价值远程医疗的次优结果的证据需要新的思考。作者不知道有任何其他研究为远程医疗的新研究提供了卓有成效的领域的专家意见分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
9.10%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: The Journal of Enabling Technologies (JET) seeks to provide a strong, insightful, international, and multi-disciplinary evidence-base in health, social care, and education. This focus is applied to how technologies can be enabling for children, young people and adults in varied and different aspects of their lives. The focus remains firmly on reporting innovations around how technologies are used and evaluated in practice, and the impact that they have on the people using them. In addition, the journal has a keen focus on drawing out practical implications for users and how/why technology may have a positive impact. This includes messages for users, practitioners, researchers, stakeholders and caregivers (in the broadest sense). The impact of research in this arena is vital and therefore we are committed to publishing work that helps draw this out; thus providing implications for practice. JET aims to raise awareness of available and developing technologies and their uses in health, social care and education for a wide and varied readership. The areas in which technologies can be enabling for the scope of JET include, but are not limited to: Communication and interaction, Learning, Independence and autonomy, Identity and culture, Safety, Health, Care and support, Wellbeing, Quality of life, Access to services.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信