Adams Samantha
Erasmus University Medical Center, Department of Health Policy and Management, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2003;2003:774.
The quality of online medical information available for patients has long been a concern of health care professionals. [1-4] Although initiatives exist for patients to use when searching for information, there is the concern that these initiatives are either ineffective or even counter-productive. [5-6] Another criticism is that initiatives do not sufficiently achieve their respective goals. [7-8] It is important to consider that many initiatives have been designed with patients in mind, but not with patients involved. Various portals, seals, rating systems, ethical codes, etc., exist ostensibly for patients, but arose largely without concrete input from real patients-as-end-users. Literature addressing usability on the basis of studies assessing real patients' searching behaviors appeared only in 2002. [9-11] The conclusions from these studies, while insightful, reflect the need for ongoing research into the daily practices of patients searching for web-based health care information. This poster highlights the first results of a systematic ethnographic study (interviews and shadow-searching carried out between November, 2001 and August, 2003) to determine how patients approach health care information when searching on the internet and illustrates the different strategies that patients use to assess the health information they encounter on the web.
长期以来，可供患者获取的在线医疗信息质量一直是医疗保健专业人员关注的问题。[1 - 4] 尽管有一些举措可供患者在搜索信息时使用，但人们担心这些举措要么无效，甚至适得其反。[5 - 6] 另一种批评是，这些举措未能充分实现各自的目标。[7 - 8] 重要的是要考虑到，许多举措在设计时考虑到了患者，但没有患者的参与。各种门户网站、认证标识、评级系统、道德规范等表面上是为患者而设，但很大程度上是在没有实际患者作为最终用户的具体参与下产生的。基于评估实际患者搜索行为的研究来探讨可用性的文献直到2002年才出现。[9 - 11] 这些研究得出的结论虽然具有启发性，但反映出有必要对患者搜索基于网络的医疗保健信息的日常行为进行持续研究。这张海报展示了一项系统性人种学研究（在2001年11月至2003年8月期间进行了访谈和跟踪搜索）的初步结果，以确定患者在互联网上搜索时如何获取医疗保健信息，并说明了患者用于评估他们在网上遇到的健康信息的不同策略。
