Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorHaase, Christoffer Bjerre
dc.contributor.authorAjjawi, Rola
dc.contributor.authorBearman, Margaret
dc.contributor.authorBrodersen, John
dc.contributor.authorRisør, Torsten
dc.contributor.authorHoeyer, Klaus
dc.date.accessioned2023-08-29T08:38:55Z
dc.date.available2023-08-29T08:38:55Z
dc.date.issued2023-04-25
dc.description.abstractPeople are increasingly able to generate their own health data through new technologies such as wearables and online symptom checkers. However, generating data is one thing, interpreting them another. General practitioners (GPs) are likely to be the first to help with interpretations. Policymakers in the European Union are investing heavily in infrastructures to provide GPs access to patient measurements. But there may be a disconnect between policy ambitions and the everyday practices of GPs. To investigate this, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 23 Danish GPs. According to the GPs, patients relatively rarely bring data to them. GPs mostly remember three types of patient-generated data that patients bring to them for interpretation: heart and sleep measurements from wearables and results from online symptom checkers. However, they also spoke extensively about data work with patient queries concerning measurements from the GPs’ own online Patient Reported Outcome system and online access to laboratory results. We juxtapose GP reflections on these five data types and between policy ambitions and everyday practices. These data require substantial recontextualization work before the GPs ascribe them evidential value and act on them. Even when they perceived as actionable, patient-provided data are not approached as measurements, as suggested by policy frameworks. Rather, GPs treat them as analogous to symptoms—that is to say, GPs treat patient-provided data as subjective evidence rather than authoritative measures. Drawing on Science and Technology Studies (STS) literature,we suggest that GPs must be part of the conversation with policy makers and digital entrepreneurs around when and how to integrate patient-generated data into healthcare infrastructures.en_US
dc.identifier.citationHaase, Ajjawi, Bearman, Brodersen, Risør, Hoeyer. Data as symptom: Doctors’ responses to patient-provided data in general practice. Social Studies of Science. 2023en_US
dc.identifier.cristinIDFRIDAID 2158514
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/03063127231164345
dc.identifier.issn0306-3127
dc.identifier.issn1460-3659
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10037/30497
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherSAGE Publicationsen_US
dc.relation.journalSocial Studies of Science
dc.rights.accessRightsopenAccessen_US
dc.rights.holderCopyright 2023 The Author(s)en_US
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0en_US
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0)en_US
dc.titleData as symptom: Doctors’ responses to patient-provided data in general practiceen_US
dc.type.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.typeTidsskriftartikkelen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US


File(s) in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0)
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0)