Requirements analysis of information services for patients on a general practitioner's website - Patient and general practitioner's perspectives

Methods of Information in Medicine

Volumn 46, Issue 6, 2007, Pages 629-635

  Prins, Astrid H ^a,b   Abu Hanna, A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

GP; Information services (MeSH); Medical websites; Requirements analysis

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; GENERAL PRACTITIONER; INFORMATION SERVICE; INTERNET; NETHERLANDS; PRESCRIPTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SEMI STRUCTURED INTERVIEW; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE SURVEYS; HEALTH EDUCATION; HUMANS; INFORMATION SERVICES; INTERNET; INTERVIEWS AS TOPIC; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NETHERLANDS; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PERCEPTION; PHYSICIANS, FAMILY;

EID: 37349100442     PISSN: 00261270     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3414/ME0409     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Council for Public Health and Health Care. From patient to client, 2003 (in Dutch).
2. Powell JA, Darvell M, et al. The doctor, the patient and the world-wide web: how the internet is changing healthcare. J R Soc Med 2003; 96: 74-76.
3. Smith JJ, Mallard-Smith RJ, et al. Use of information technology in general practice. J R Soc Med 2003; 96: 395-397
4. Howitt A. An evaluation of general practice websites in the UK, Family Practice 2002: 19: 547-556.
5. Potts H, Wyatt J. Survey of Doctors' Experience of Patients Using the Internet. JMIR 2002: 4(1): e5.
6. Murray E, Lo B, et al. The impact of health information on the internet on health care and the physician-patient relationship. JMIR 2003; 5(3): e17.
7. Commission of the European Communities. eEurope 2002: Quality Criteria for Health related website http://www.jmir.Org/2002/3/e15/, JMIR 2002; 4(3): e15.
8. Kim P, Eng T, et al. Published criteria for evaluating health related web sites. BMJ 1999: 318: 647-649.
9. Winker M, Flanagin A, et al. Guidelines for medical and health information sites on the internet. JAMA 2000: 283: 12: 1600-1601.
10. AMA, Guidelines for AMA web sites, JAMA 2000: 283: 12: 1602-1607.
11. de Roos M, Brouwer HJ, et al. Assessment criteria for websites with health information. GP and Science 2002; 45 (6): 290-293 (in Dutch).
12. Eysenbach G, Powell J, et al. Empirical Studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the World Wide Web. JAMA 2002: 20: 2691-2699.
13. http://www.hon.ch.
14. Silberg WM, Lundberg DM, et al. Assessing, controlling and assuring the quality of medical information on the internet. JAMA 1997: 277 (15): 1244-5.
15. Sherrell LB, Chen L. The W lifecycle Model and Associated Methodology for Corporate Web Site Development. Communications of AIS 2001: 5 article 7.
16. Murugesan S, Deshpande Y, Hansen S, Ginige A. Web Engineering: A New Discipline for Development of Web-based Systems. First ICSE Workshop on Web Engineering (WebE-99). Los Angeles, USA: 1999. pp 1-9.
17. Ginige A. Web Engineering: Methodologies for Developing Large and Maintainable, Proc IEEF International Conference on Networking the India and the World CNIW-98, Ahmedabad, India. 1998.
18. Nielsen J. Functional webdesign. Indianapolis: Pearson Education; 2001.
19. Vogel J, Cox D. Checklist voor een praktijkwebsite (in Dutch). www.artsennet.nl (viewed 12, 2003).
20. Somerville I. Software Engineering. Wokingham: Addison-Wesley; 1995.
21. Macinko J, Starfield B, et al. The Contribution of Primary Care Systems to Health Outcomes within Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Countries, 1970-1998. Health Serv Res. 2003; 38 (3): 831-865. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1360919#b76
22. European primary care. The Hague: Health Council of the Netherlands. 2004; publication no. 2004/20E. ISBN-10: 90-5549-549-2, http:/www.gr.nl/ adviezen.php?ID=1119.