医疗保健领域的数字灵药:市场情报和政策影响

IF 1.5 Q3 MANAGEMENT
Naveen R. Gowda, H. Vikas, Sidhartha Satpathy, Anjali Ramaswamy, Meghana Prabhu, Atul Kumar, Ananth Kini, Angel Rajan Singh, D. K. Sharma, Devashish Desai, J. B. Sharma, Praveen R. Gowda, Rajkumar, Bharath Gopinath, Chandrashekhar Huded, K. P. Sowmya, T. K. Divya, Khyati Vakharia, Somanath Viswanath, Dhayal C. John, Neeraj Gudipati
{"title":"医疗保健领域的数字灵药:市场情报和政策影响","authors":"Naveen R. Gowda, H. Vikas, Sidhartha Satpathy, Anjali Ramaswamy, Meghana Prabhu, Atul Kumar, Ananth Kini, Angel Rajan Singh, D. K. Sharma, Devashish Desai, J. B. Sharma, Praveen R. Gowda, Rajkumar, Bharath Gopinath, Chandrashekhar Huded, K. P. Sowmya, T. K. Divya, Khyati Vakharia, Somanath Viswanath, Dhayal C. John, Neeraj Gudipati","doi":"10.1007/s40622-023-00370-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>There is an increasing emphasis on digital health. However, success of digital health depends on voluntary adoption, which requires good product–market fit for a wide range of users. A national-level survey through snowball sampling was conducted from November 2020 to March 2021 among all MBBS doctors willing to participate. A total of 1010 doctors from different sectors, locations, qualifications with wide range of experience and patient load participated. Doctors from across the board felt going digital would entail long learning curves, additional workload, more screen time and that they do not improve overall quality of care. Majority feel digital solutions do not help in increasing net revenue and consequently prefer free-of-cost digital solutions. Among those willing to pay, onetime investment for hardware/equipment (38%) followed by annual subscription for software licenses (34%) are the preferred modalities. Seventy-four percent of doctors expressed not being comfortable with government providing digital solutions or controlling the data. In order to make the findings more practical and relevant, digital health adoption curve and market intelligence grid have been proposed. Digital health companies can use the adoption curve to understand how adoption can fluctuate with cost, ease of use and data policy. The grid can help companies identify the requirements of their target segment of doctors and therefore achieve better product–market fit.</p>","PeriodicalId":43923,"journal":{"name":"Decision","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Digital elixir for healthcare: market intelligence and policy implications\",\"authors\":\"Naveen R. Gowda, H. Vikas, Sidhartha Satpathy, Anjali Ramaswamy, Meghana Prabhu, Atul Kumar, Ananth Kini, Angel Rajan Singh, D. K. Sharma, Devashish Desai, J. B. Sharma, Praveen R. Gowda, Rajkumar, Bharath Gopinath, Chandrashekhar Huded, K. P. Sowmya, T. K. Divya, Khyati Vakharia, Somanath Viswanath, Dhayal C. John, Neeraj Gudipati\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40622-023-00370-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>There is an increasing emphasis on digital health. However, success of digital health depends on voluntary adoption, which requires good product–market fit for a wide range of users. A national-level survey through snowball sampling was conducted from November 2020 to March 2021 among all MBBS doctors willing to participate. A total of 1010 doctors from different sectors, locations, qualifications with wide range of experience and patient load participated. Doctors from across the board felt going digital would entail long learning curves, additional workload, more screen time and that they do not improve overall quality of care. Majority feel digital solutions do not help in increasing net revenue and consequently prefer free-of-cost digital solutions. Among those willing to pay, onetime investment for hardware/equipment (38%) followed by annual subscription for software licenses (34%) are the preferred modalities. Seventy-four percent of doctors expressed not being comfortable with government providing digital solutions or controlling the data. In order to make the findings more practical and relevant, digital health adoption curve and market intelligence grid have been proposed. Digital health companies can use the adoption curve to understand how adoption can fluctuate with cost, ease of use and data policy. The grid can help companies identify the requirements of their target segment of doctors and therefore achieve better product–market fit.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":43923,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Decision\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Decision\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40622-023-00370-z\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Decision","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40622-023-00370-z","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人们越来越重视数字健康。然而,数字医疗的成功取决于用户的自愿采用,这就需要为广大用户提供良好的产品-市场契合度。2020 年 11 月至 2021 年 3 月,通过滚雪球式抽样,对所有愿意参与的 MBBS 医生进行了一次全国范围的调查。共有 1010 名来自不同行业、不同地区、不同资历、具有不同经验和患者量的医生参与了调查。所有医生都认为,数字化会带来漫长的学习曲线、额外的工作量、更多的屏幕时间,而且不会提高整体医疗质量。大多数人认为数字化解决方案无助于增加净收入,因此更倾向于免费的数字化解决方案。在愿意付费的医生中,硬件/设备的一次性投资(38%)和软件许可证的年度订购(34%)是首选方式。74%的医生表示不愿意由政府提供数字化解决方案或控制数据。为了使调查结果更加实用和相关,我们提出了数字医疗采用曲线和市场情报网格。数字医疗公司可以利用采用曲线了解采用率如何随成本、易用性和数据政策而波动。网格可以帮助公司确定目标医生群体的需求,从而实现更好的产品与市场契合。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Digital elixir for healthcare: market intelligence and policy implications

Digital elixir for healthcare: market intelligence and policy implications

There is an increasing emphasis on digital health. However, success of digital health depends on voluntary adoption, which requires good product–market fit for a wide range of users. A national-level survey through snowball sampling was conducted from November 2020 to March 2021 among all MBBS doctors willing to participate. A total of 1010 doctors from different sectors, locations, qualifications with wide range of experience and patient load participated. Doctors from across the board felt going digital would entail long learning curves, additional workload, more screen time and that they do not improve overall quality of care. Majority feel digital solutions do not help in increasing net revenue and consequently prefer free-of-cost digital solutions. Among those willing to pay, onetime investment for hardware/equipment (38%) followed by annual subscription for software licenses (34%) are the preferred modalities. Seventy-four percent of doctors expressed not being comfortable with government providing digital solutions or controlling the data. In order to make the findings more practical and relevant, digital health adoption curve and market intelligence grid have been proposed. Digital health companies can use the adoption curve to understand how adoption can fluctuate with cost, ease of use and data policy. The grid can help companies identify the requirements of their target segment of doctors and therefore achieve better product–market fit.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Decision
Decision MANAGEMENT-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
期刊介绍: The aim of the Journal, Decision, is to publish qualitative, quantitative, survey-based, simulation-based research articles at the national and sub-national levels. While there is no stated regional focus of the journal, we are more interested in examining if and how individuals, firms and governments in emerging economies may make decisions differently. Published for the management scholars, business executives and managers, the Journal aims to advance the management research by publishing empirically and theoretically grounded articles in management decision making process. The Editors aim to provide an efficient and high-quality review process to the authors. The Journal accepts submissions in several formats such as original research papers, case studies, review articles and book reviews (book reviews are only by invitation). The Journal welcomes research-based, original and insightful articles on organizational, individual, socio-economic-political, environmental decision making with relevance to theory and practice of business. It also focusses on the managerial decision-making challenges in private, public, private-public partnership and non-profit organizations. The Journal also encourages case studies that provide a rich description of the business or societal contexts in managerial decision-making process including areas – but not limited to – conflict over natural resources, product innovation and copyright laws, legislative or policy change, socio-technical embedding of financial markets, particularly in developing economy, an ethnographic understanding of relations at a workplace, or social network in marketing management, etc. Research topics covered in the Journal include (but not limited to): Finance and Accounting Organizational Theory and Behavior Decision Science Public Policy-Economic Insights Operation Management Innovation and Entrepreneurship Information Technology and Systems Management Optimization and Modelling Supply Chain Management Data Analytics Marketing Management Human Resource Management
×
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