J. Woolham, P. Freddolino, G. Gibson, Sarah R. Daniels
{"title":"十字路口的远程护理?寻找可研究的问题","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":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"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\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"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}","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}
Telecare at a crossroads? Finding researchable questions
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.
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.