Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Struggling with and mastering e-mail consultations: A study of access, interaction, and participation in a digital health care system Cover

Struggling with and mastering e-mail consultations: A study of access, interaction, and participation in a digital health care system

Open Access
|Sep 2021

References

  1. Assing Hvidt, E., Søndergaard, J., Klausen, M., & Grønning, A. (2020). Not just an information-delivery tool: An ethnographic study exploring Danish GPs’ perspectives on and experiences with the relational potential of email consultation. Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care, 38(4), 411–420. https://doi.org/10.1080/02813432.2020.1843939
  2. Bergström, A. (2017). Digital equality and the uptake of digital applications among seniors of different age. Nordicom Review, 38(S1), 79–91. https://doi.org/10.1515/nor-2017-0398
  3. Biro, D. (2011). Listening to pain: Finding words, compassion and relief. W. W. Norton & Company.
  4. Carpentier, N. (2011). The concept of participation: If they have access and interact, do they really participate? Communication Management Quarterly, 21, 13–36. https://www.academia.edu/1151341/Interrogating_audiences_Theoretical_horizons_of_participation
  5. Carpentier, N., & Dahlgren, P. (2011). Introduction: Interrogating audiences – Theoretical horizons of participation. Communication Management Quarterly, 21, 7–12. https://www.academia.edu/1151341/Interrogating_audiences_Theoretical_horizons_of_participation
  6. Chayko, M. (2017). Superconnected: The internet, digital media, and techno-social life. Sage.
  7. Christensen, C. L. (2017). Healthy ageing and mediated health expertise. Nordicom Review, 38(S1), 9–23. https://doi.org/10.1515/nor-2017-0403
  8. Cooke, B., & Kothari, U. (2001). Participation: The new tyranny? Zed Books.
  9. Davis, K. (1988). Power under the microscope. Foris Publications.
  10. Eeckman, E. (2019). Power to the patient? Studying the balance of power between patient and GP in relation to Web health information. In M. F. Murru, F. Colombo, L. Peja, S. Tosoni, R. Kilborn, R. Kunelius, P. Pruulmann-Vengerfeldt, L. Kramp, & N. Carpentier (Eds.), Communication as the intersection of the old and the new (pp. 185–196). edition lumière. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-396012
  11. Fage-Butler, A., & Jensen, M. N. (2015). The relevance of existing health communication models in the email age: An integrative literature review. Communication & Medicine, 12(2–3), 117–128. https://doi.org/10.1558/cam.18399
  12. Farr, M., Banks, J., Edwards, H. B., Northstone, K., Bernard, E., Salisbury, C., & Horwood, J. (2018). Implementing online consultations in primary care: A mixed-method evaluation extending normalisation process theory through service coproduction. BMJ Open, 8, e019966. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019966
  13. Félix-Brasdefer, J. C. (2015). The language of service encounters: A pragmatic-discursive approach. Cambridge University Press.
  14. General Practitioners Organisation [Praktiserende Lægers Organisation]. (2010, June). Lægernes overenskomst om almen praksis [Physicians’ agreement on general practice]. https://www.laeger.dk/Overenskomstom-almen-praksis
  15. General Practitioners Organisation [Praktiserende Lægers Organisation]. (2020). Aktivitet og økonomi i almen praksis i dagtid og vagttid 2009 til 2019 [Activity and economy in General Practice 2009–2019]. https://www.laeger.dk/sites/default/files/aktivitet_og_oekonomi_2019.pdf
  16. Gibson, J. J. (1977). The theory of affordances. In R. Shaw, & J. Bransford (Eds.), Perceiving, acting and knowing: Toward an ecological psychology (pp. 67–82). Lawrence Erlbaum. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315467931
  17. Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to perception. Houghton Mifflin.
  18. Grønning, A., Assing Hvidt, E., Nisbeth Brøgger, M., & Fage-Butler, A. (2020). How do patients and general practitioners in Denmark perceive the communicative advantages and disadvantages of access via email consultations? A media-theoretical qualitative study. BMJ Open, 10, e039442. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-039442
  19. Hansen, C. S., Christensen, K. L., & Ertmann, R. (2014). Patients and general practitioners have different approaches to e-mail consultations. Danish Medical Journal, 61(6), A4863. https://ugeskriftet.dk/files/scientific_article_files/2018-11/a4863.pdf
  20. Higgs, P., Leontowitsch, M., Stevenson, F., & Jones, I. R. (2009). Not just old and sick – the “will to health” in later life. Age and Society, 29(5), 687–707. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X08008271
  21. Hutchby, I. (2001). Conversation and technology: From the telephone to the Internet. Polity.
  22. Karhula, T., Kauppila, T., Elonheimo, O., & Brommels, M. (2011). Use of email in communication between the Finnish primary healthcare system and general practitioners. Informatics in Primary Care, 19, 25–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.14236/jhi.v19i1.790
  23. Klausen, M., & Grønning, A. (2021). My throat “tickles”: Bodies in affective discourse in patient-doctor email consultations. Conjunctions. Transdisciplinary Journal of Cultural Participation, Special issue on Health, media and participation, 8(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.7146/tjcp.v8i1.123038
  24. Kozinets, R. V. (2015). Netnography: Redefined (2nd ed.). Sage.
  25. Kristensen, D. B., Banke, S., & Kuruoglu, A. (2021). Tracking towards care: Relational affordances of self-tracking in gym culture. Sociology of Health and Illness. Advance Online Publication. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.13352
  26. Markham, A., & Buchanan, E. (2012). Ethical decision-making and internet research (version 2.0): Recommendations from the AoIR Ethics Working Committee. Association of Internet Researchers.
  27. Ministry of Health and Senior Citizens [Sundheds- og Ældreministeriet]. (2018a). Ét Sikkert og Sammenhængende Sundhedsnetværk for alle: Strategi for digital sundhed 2018–2022 [One safe and cohesive healthcare network for everybody: Strategy for digital health 2018–2022].
  28. Ministry of Health and Senior Citizens [Sundheds- og Ældreministeriet]. (2018b). En læge tæt på dig: En plan for fremtidens almen praksis [A doctor close to you: A plan for future general practice].
  29. Mortensen, M. (2019). Struggles for visibility: Surveillance representations and self-representations of terrorists in the news media. Journalism studies, 20(7), 911–931. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2018.1464403
  30. Newhouse, N., Lupiáñez-Villanueva, F., Codagnone, C., & Atherton, H. (2015). Patient use of email for health care communication purposes across 14 European countries: An analysis of users according to demographic and health-related factors. J Med Internet Res, 17(3), e58. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.3700
  31. Norman, D. A. (1990). The design of everyday things. Basic Books.
  32. OECD. (2013). OECD skills outlook 2013: First results from the survey of adult skills. OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264204256-en
  33. Rasmussen, S. R., Bech, C. F., & Wentzer, H. S. (2017). Digitale tilbud til behandling af angst og depression – Forskningsrapport: Videnssøgning i Danmark [Digital offers for the treatment of anxiety and depression – Research report: Knowledge search in Denmark]. KORA.
  34. Rich, E., Miah, A., & Lewis, S. (2019). Is digital health care more equitable? The framing of health inequalities within England's digital health policy 2010–2017. Sociology of Health & Illness, 41, 31–49. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.12980
  35. Schwennesen, N. (2019). Algorithmic assemblages of care: Imaginaries, epistemologies and repair work. Sociology of Health & Illness, 41(S1), 176–192. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.12900
  36. Stage, C., Eriksson, B., & Fabian, L. (2015). Introduction: Participation across institutional and disciplinary boundaries. Conjunctions. Transdisciplinary Journal of Cultural Participation, 2(2).
  37. Statistics Denmark. (2019). Statbank Denmark. https://www.statbank.dk/statbank5a/default.asp?w=1440
  38. Steiner, L., & Bronstein, C. (2017). Leave a comment: Mommyblogs and the everyday struggle to reclaim parenthood. Feminist Media Studies, 17(1), 59–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2017.1261840
  39. Stroobant, J., Van den Bogaert, S., & Raeymaeckers, K. (2019). When medicine meets media: How health news is co-produced between health and media professionals. Journalism Studies, 20(13), 1828–1845. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2018.1539344
  40. Taiminen, H. M., Saraniemi, S., Joffe, G., Stenberg, J.-H., & Parkinson, J. (2019). Reducing health inequalities trough digital options in mental health: A physician's perspective. Health Marketing Quarterly, 36(2), 93–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/07359683.2019.1575059
  41. Thompson, J. B. (2005). The new visibility. Theory, Culture & Society, 22(6), 31–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276405059413
  42. Timmermans, S., & Berg, M. (2010). The gold standard: The challenge of evidence-based medicine. Temple University Press.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/nor-2021-0038 | Journal eISSN: 2001-5119 | Journal ISSN: 1403-1108
Language: English
Page range: 7 - 21
Published on: Sep 9, 2021
Published by: University of Gothenburg Nordicom
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 2 issues per year

© 2021 Anette Grønning, published by University of Gothenburg Nordicom
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.