Table 8.
Importance of the integrated MEK-EDIPS tool in the health scenario.
| Activities to be supported | Level of importance, n (%) | |||||
|
|
A little important | Somewhat important | Important | Very important | Extremely important | |
| For patients and relatives |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obtaining information on the disease, additional understanding, and, consequently, better treatment | 0 (0) | 1 (6) | 3 (17) | 4 (22) | 7 (39) |
|
|
Facilitating the interaction with people who are going through, or have gone through the same illness | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 4 (22) | 4 (22) | 7 (39) |
|
|
Improving the reliability of the information that they get. This is an expected result because the shared information is read and evaluated by a larger number of people (some of them could be specialists) | 0 (0) | 3 (17) | 2 (11) | 3 (17) | 7 (39) |
| For health professionals |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Possibility to more easily expand their knowledge by obtaining additional scientific information, articles, results of experiments, and procedures provided by specialists in an area of interest | 0 (0) | 3 (17) | 1 (6) | 2 (11) | 9 (50) |
|
|
Obtaining information that may help in the treatment, but that is usually omitted in consultations; for example, major doubts, unreliable data the patient may rely upon, reactions, beliefs, etc | 0 (0) | 1 (6) | 3 (17) | 2 (11) | 9 (50) |
| For researchers |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Collecting information or results to help them create new hypotheses and do further research | 0 (0) | 1 (6) | 4 (22) | 2 (11) | 8 (44) |
| For managers |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Improving the provision of health information based on the identification of the most interesting topics for patients and health professionals | 0 (0) | 1 (6) | 4 (22) | 2 (11) | 8 (44) |