From Practice to Theory and back to Practice: Reflexivity in Measurement and Evaluation for Evidence-based Policy Making in the Information Society

Misuraca, Gianluca; Codagnone, Cristiano; Rossel, P.

doi:10.1016/j.giq.2012.07.011

Cited by 45 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 62 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Firstly, in the theoretical part we outline the background of digital inequality, discuss the research in this field, and suggest a model of digital inequality. We agree with Misuraca, Codagnone & Rossel (2013) that existing models of digital inequality research lack impact measurements and cannot explain the persistent state of digital inequality along with the obvious advancement of technology and its usage. In the following chapter, we link the topic of digital inequality to the current situation in Slovenia and the strategies that the county is implementing while developing its information society.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 85%

“…Webster (2014, p. 10) saw the information society through a technological, economic, occupational, spatial, and cultural prism, sharing the conviction that quantitative changes in information are bringing about this qualitatively new sort of social system. Misuraca et al (2013) claim that the information society emerged out of IT use in the realm of firms and then became broadly pervasive in the whole of society, with such use being focussed on the socio-economic impacts. While the private sector is primarily oriented towards monetary measures of IT expenditure, the information society includes the availability, access, adoption, usage, and impact of IT on society as a whole .…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the area of e-government benchmarking, critics warn that e-government indexes mostly measure the offer or ex-ante existence of websites and services in all countries and environments, without focusing on specifics (Bannister, 2007;Misuraca et al, 2013;Whitmore, 2012). They propose the obligatory measurement of the use of online services or online procedures as a supplement to user surveys, which is achieved to a smaller degree by the DESI Index.…”

Section: Information Society Indexes -Digital Inequality Gap Detectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Model of Digital Inequality in the Knowledge Society: The Case of Slovenia

Dečman¹

2017

CEPAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The knowledge society defines information technology (IT) as the crucial factor in accessing knowledge today. At the same time, knowledge itself represents the precondition for using technology. This paradox is linked with the concept of digital inequality, which examines the difference between people in society and includes various levels, such as physical access to technology, possession of the skills to use it, social and cultural influences, and relations between and within these levels. Although the phenomenon of digital inequality is at least two decades old, it has an important role even today. The following paper discusses the notion of digital inequality and links it to information technology access and use in the society. Using the results of 1568 questionnaires completed by a representative sample of Slovenian citizens in 2016, it develops a five-level model that indicates the factors influencing the reasons for the inequalities. The results show that the survey misses the top two levels of the model, but indicate that gender differences are diminishing while income differences significantly influence internet availability, digital skills, and IT use. The results suggest changes in policies that countries should implement to achieve digital inclusion for everyone and consequently the highest possible use of IT and the benefits for society that come with it.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 85%

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Information Society Indexes -Digital Inequality Gap Detectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Model of Digital Inequality in the Knowledge Society: The Case of Slovenia

Dečman¹

2017

CEPAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, as technological solutions seek to enable new healthcare relationships and partnerships, there is a growing interest in examining information and communications technology (ICT) to support the development of Connected Health. Connected Health has been defined by Richardson (2015) Heathfield et al, 1998;Fineout-Overholt et al, 2005;Misuraca et al, 2013;Tuffaha et al, 2014). This paper offers an overview of some of the key evaluation frameworks in e-health and information systems (IS) and investigates how these can contribute towards the evaluation of Connected Health.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating Multiple Perspectives of a Connected Health Ecosystem

Carroll

Travers

Richardson

2016

Proceedings of the 9th International Joint Conference on Biomedical Engineering Systems and Technologies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Connected Health is an emerging model of care that engages technology to improve patient care and (re)habilitation. It encourages self-efficacy by developing client-centred care pathways and evidence-based interventions to reduce the need for hospital-led care and empower patients in their homes. It also promotes improved 'connectivity' between healthcare stakeholders by means of timely sharing and presentation of accurate and pertinent information about patient status. Connected Health initiatives can achieve this through smarter use of data, devices, communication platforms and people. However, there are few efforts which have established an evaluation model to encapsulate and assess the value and potential impact of Connected Health solutions from multiple stakeholders' perspectives. We examined information systems (IS) and health information systems (HIS) literature to identify whether a model could apply to Connected Health. However, many of the evaluation models are narrow in focus but have influenced our development of the Connected Health Evaluation Framework (CHEF). CHEF offers a generic approach which encapsulates a holistic view of a Connected Health evaluation process. It focuses on four key domains: enduser perception, business growth, quality management and healthcare practice.

show abstract

“…Анализ источников по теме исследования включил в себя актуальные публикации отечественных и зарубежных исследователей (Егоров, Андронов, 2012;Грум-Гржимайло, 2010a;Грум-Гржимайло, 2010b;Молодыченко, Олексенко, 2014;Овчинников, Гришин, 2012;Омарова, 2015;Соколов, 2012;Хрыков, 2011;Юсупов, 2013;Ciborra, 1983;Cîmpian, Lazar, Gabor, 2014;Kornienko, Kornienko, Fofanov, Chubik, 2015;May, 2000;Misuraca, Codagnone, Rossel, 2013;Schlichter, Danylchenko, 2014), а также аналитические доклады различных зарубежных организаций 1 .…”

unclassified

Knowledge economy: global issues, regional solutions, perspectives

Гюльмамедов¹

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From Practice to Theory and back to Practice: Reflexivity in Measurement and Evaluation for Evidence-based Policy Making in the Information Society

Cited by 45 publications

References 62 publications

A Model of Digital Inequality in the Knowledge Society: The Case of Slovenia

A Model of Digital Inequality in the Knowledge Society: The Case of Slovenia

Evaluating Multiple Perspectives of a Connected Health Ecosystem

Knowledge economy: global issues, regional solutions, perspectives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About