What Is eHealth (3): A Systematic Review of Published Definitions

By Ha-Min Oh, C. Rizo, M. Enkin, A. Jadad. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 2005

930 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Context The term eHealth is widely used by many individuals, academic institutions, professional bodies, and funding organizations. It has become an accepted neologism despite the lack of an agreed-upon clear or precise definition. We believe that communication among the many individuals and organizations that use the term could be improved by comprehensive data about the range of meanings encompassed by the term. Objective To report the results of a systematic review of published, suggested, or proposed definitions of eHealth. Data Sources Using the search query string “eHealth” OR “e-Health” OR “electronic health”, we searched the following databases: Medline and Premedline (1966-June 2004), EMBASE (1980-May 2004), International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970-May 2004), Web of Science (all years), Information Sciences Abstracts (1966-May 2004), Library Information Sciences Abstracts (1969-May 2004), and Wilson Business Abstracts (1982-March 2004). In addition, we searched dictionaries and an Internet search engine. Study Selection We included any source published in either print format or on the Internet, available in English, and containing text that defines or attempts to define eHealth in explicit terms. Two of us independently reviewed titles and abstracts of citations identified in the bibliographic databases and Internet search, reaching consensus on relevance by discussion. Data Extraction We retrieved relevant reports, articles, references, letters, and websites containing definitions of eHealth. Two of us qualitatively analyzed the definitions and coded them for content, emerging themes, patterns, and novel ideas. Data Synthesis The 51 unique definitions that we retrieved showed a wide range of themes, but no clear consensus about the meaning of the term eHealth. We identified 2 universal themes (health and technology) and 6 less general (commerce, activities, stakeholders, outcomes, place, and perspectives). Conclusions The widespread use of the term eHealth suggests that it is an important concept, and that there is a tacit understanding of its meaning. This compendium of proposed definitions may improve communication among the many individuals and organizations that use the term.

Subfields: Applied Psychology, General Health Professions

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/afa3afeba4c98d5abccc871851a37070095f6191

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Applied Psychology

In General Health Professions

Citations in the corpus

A Holistic Framework to Improve the Uptake and Impact of eHealth Technologies (2011, positive): “It uses a description of eHealth from Canada’s Health Informatics Association (defined in Oh et al [46]) to connect providers, patients, and governments; to educate and inform health care professionals, managers, and consumers; to stimulate innovation in care delivery and health system management; a”
Determinants of physicians' technology acceptance for e-health in ambulatory care (2012, methodology): “compared 51 definitions of e-health in 2005 [17].”
Toward a definition of competency-based education in medicine: a systematic review of published definitions (2010, methodology): “Using methods similar to those used in other systematic reviews intended to create common definitions (Ainoda et al. 2005; Oh et al. 2005), we conducted a comprehensive inquiry of the scholarly sources related to CBE that provided definitions in English or French.”
What Is eHealth (4): A Scoping Exercise to Map the Field (2005, background): “The current paper reports descriptive work to profile and define the field, which was conducted independently of, but complements, the systematic review of definitions of eHealth provided elsewhere in this volume [10].”
The Impact of eHealth on the Quality and Safety of Health Care: A Systematic Overview (2011, background): “At the most elementary level, the literature that constitutes the evidence base is poorly referenced within bibliographic databases reflecting the nonstandard usage of terminology and lack of consensus on a taxonomy relating to eHealth technologies [133– 135].”
The Taxonomy of Telemedicine (2011, neutral): “11,12 Thus, e-health and m-health are highly technetronic.”
The role of Information and Communication Technologies in healthcare: taxonomies, perspectives, and challenges (2018, background): “[211] in their study found up to 51 unique definitions for e-health.”
eHealth Literacy: Essential Skills for Consumer Health in a Networked World (2006, background): “Eng (2001) defines eHealth as “the use of emerging information and communication technology, especially the Internet, to improve or enable health and health care [15]; this is one of many published definitions currently in use [16].”
Mobile Health Applications for the Most Prevalent Conditions by the World Health Organization: Review and Analysis (2013, background): “In the field of telehealth, eHealth has arisen as a paradigm involving the concepts of health, technology, and commerce, with commerce and technology as tools in the service of health [3].”
eHealth Literacy: Extending the Digital Divide to the Realm of Health Information (2012, background): “eHealth, a relatively new concept [1], refers to “the use of emerging information and communications technology to improve or enable health and health care” [2].”