Athena Institute, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Institute for Science in Society, Radboud Universiteit, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2021 Feb 15;28(2):276-283. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocaa273.
Diane Forsythe and other feminist scholars have long shown how system builders' tacit assumptions lead to the systematic erasure of certain users from the design process. In spite of this phenomena being known in the health informatics literature for decades, recent research shows how patient portals and electronic patients health records continue to reproduce health inequalities in Western societies. To better understand this discrepancy between scholarly awareness of such inequities and mainstream design, this study unravels the (conceptual) assumptions and practices of designers and others responsible for portal implementation in the Netherlands and how citizens living in vulnerable circumstances are included in this process.
We conducted semistructured interviews (n = 24) and questionnaires (n = 14) with portal designers, health professionals, and policy advisors.
In daily design practices, equity is seen as an "end-of-the-pipeline" concern. Respondents identify health care professionals rather than patients as their main users. If patients are included in the design, this generally entails patients in privileged positions. The needs of citizens living in vulnerable circumstances are not prioritized in design processes. Developers legitimize their focus with reference to the innovation-theoretical approach of the Diffusion of Innovations.
Although feminist scholars have developed important understandings of the exclusion of citizens living in vulnerable circumstances from portal design, other academic efforts have profoundly shaped daily practices of portal development. Diane Forsythe would likely have taken up this discrepancy as a challenge by finding ways to translate these insights into mainstream systems design.
黛安·福赛思(Diane Forsythe)和其他女性主义学者长期以来一直表明,系统构建者的隐性假设如何导致某些用户被系统地从设计过程中删除。尽管这种现象在健康信息学文献中已经存在了几十年,但最近的研究表明,患者门户和电子患者健康记录如何继续在西方社会中产生健康不平等。为了更好地理解这种学术上对这种不平等的认识与主流设计之间的差异,本研究揭示了荷兰门户实施的设计者和其他相关人员的(概念)假设和实践,以及生活在弱势环境中的公民如何被纳入这一过程。
我们对门户设计者、卫生专业人员和政策顾问进行了半结构式访谈(n=24)和问卷调查(n=14)。
在日常设计实践中,公平被视为“管道末端”的问题。受访者将卫生保健专业人员而不是患者视为其主要用户。如果将患者纳入设计,这通常意味着患者处于有利地位。处于弱势环境中的公民的需求在设计过程中没有得到优先考虑。开发人员通过参考创新扩散的创新理论方法来为其关注提供合法性。
尽管女性主义学者已经对将处于弱势环境中的公民排除在门户设计之外有了重要的认识,但其他学术努力也深刻地塑造了门户开发的日常实践。黛安·福赛思(Diane Forsythe)可能会将这种差异视为一种挑战,通过寻找将这些见解转化为主流系统设计的方法来应对这种差异。