↓ Skip to main content

Empowering patients through eHealth: a case report of a pan-European project

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
16 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Empowering patients through eHealth: a case report of a pan-European project
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12913-015-0983-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Emanuele Lettieri, Lia P. Fumagalli, Giovanni Radaelli, Paolo Bertele’, Jess Vogt, Reinhard Hammerschmidt, Juan L. Lara, Ana Carriazo, Cristina Masella

Abstract

This paper crystallises the experience developed by the pan-European PALANTE Consortium in dealing with the generation of relevant evidence from heterogeneous eHealth services for patient empowerment in nine European Regions. The European Commission (EC) recently funded a number of pan-European eHealth projects aimed at empowering European patients/citizens thus transforming the traditional patient/citizen role in the management of their health (e.g., PALANTE, SUSTAIN, CARRE, HeartCycle, Empower). However, the heterogeneity of the healthcare systems, of the implemented services and of the target patients, the use of ad-hoc definitions of the salient concepts and the development of small-size experiences have prevented the dissemination of "global" results and the development of cumulative knowledge. The main challenge has been the generation of large-scale evidence from heterogeneous small-size experiences. Three lessons have been collectively learnt during the development of the PALANTE project, which involves 9 sites that have implemented different eHealth services for empowering different typologies of patients. These lessons have been refined progressively through project meetings, reviews with the EC Project Officer and Reviewers. The paper illustrates the ten steps followed to develop the three lessons. The first lesson learnt is about how EC-funded projects should develop cumulative knowledge by avoiding self-crafted measures of outcome and by adopting literature-grounded definitions and scales. The second lesson learnt is about how EC-funded projects should identify ambitious, cross-pilot policy and research questions that allow pooling of data from across heterogeneous experiences even if a multi-centre study design was not agreed before. The third lesson learnt is about how EC-funded projects should open their collections of data and make them freely-accessible to the scientific community shortly after the conclusion of the project in order to guarantee the replicability of results and conclusions. The three lessons might provide original elements for fuelling the ongoing debate about the capability of the EC to develop evidence-based policies by pooling evidence from heterogeneous, local experiences.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 42%
Researcher 3 16%
Other 2 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 5%
Professor 1 5%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 2 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 16%
Social Sciences 2 11%
Computer Science 1 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 5%
Other 5 26%
Unknown 4 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 February 2016.
All research outputs
#882,459
of 11,208,454 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#354
of 3,573 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,217
of 235,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#16
of 117 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,208,454 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,573 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 235,345 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 117 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.