LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Turnpenny, Agnes; Beadle-Brown, Julie (2014)
Publisher: Wiley
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: H
Identifiers:doi:10.1111/hsc.12133
User choice and personalisation have been at the centre of health and\ud social care policies in many countries. Exercising choice can be especially\ud challenging for people with long-term conditions (LTC) or disabilities.\ud Information about the quality, cost and availability of services is central\ud to user choice. This study used systematic review methods to synthesise\ud evidence in three main areas: (i) how people with LTC or disabilities and\ud their family carers find and access information about the quality of\ud services; (ii) how quality information is used in decision-making; and\ud (iii) what type of quality information is most useful. Quality information\ud was defined broadly and could include formal quality reports (e.g.\ud inspection reports, report cards, etc.), information about the characteristics\ud of a service or provider (e.g. number and qualifications of staff, facilities,\ud etc.) and informal reports about quality (e.g. personal experience, etc.).\ud Literature searches were carried out using electronic databases in January\ud 2012. Thirteen papers reporting findings from empirical studies published\ud between 2001 and 2012 were included in the review. The majority of\ud papers (n = 9) had a qualitative design. The analysis highlighted the use\ud of multiple sources of information in decision-making about services and\ud in particular the importance of informal sources and extended social\ud networks in accessing information. There is limited awareness and use of\ud ‘official’ and online information sources. Service users or family carers\ud place greater emphasis on general information and structural indicators.\ud Clinical or quality-of-life outcomes are often difficult to interpret and\ud apply. Trust emerged a key issue in relation to quality information.\ud Experiential and subjective information is highly valued and trusted.\ud Various barriers to the effective use of quality information in making\ud choices about services are identified. Implications for policy and future\ud research are discussed.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Abraham, J., Sick, B., Anderson, J., Berg, A., Dehmer, C., & Tufano, A. (2011). Selecting a provider: What factors influence patients' decision making? Journal of Healthcare Management, 56(2), 99-114.
    • Anderson, L. M., Oliver, S. R., Michie, S., Rehfuess, E., Noyes, J., & Shemilt, I. (2013).
    • Investigating complexity in systematic reviews of interventions by using a spectrum of methods. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 66(11), 1223-1229. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.06.014
    • Baxter, K., Glendinning, C., & Clarke, S. (2008). Making informed choices in social care: the importance of accessible information. Health & social care in the community, 16(2), 197-207.
    • doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2524.2007.00742.x
    • Baxter, K., & Glendinning, C. (2011). Making choices about support services: Disabled adults' and older people's use of information. Health and Social Care in the Community, 19(3), 272- 279. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2524.2010.00979.x
    • Baxter, K. (2012). Changing choices: disabled and chronically reconsidering choices. Chronic Illness. doi: 10.1177/1742395312460410 Bäumker, T., Callaghan, L., Darton, R., Holder, J., Netten, A., & Towers, A. (2011). Deciding to Ageing and Society, 1(1), 1-31.
    • Beadle-Brown, J., Hutchinson, A., & Mansell, J. (2008). Care standards in homes for people with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 21(3), 210- 218. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-3148.2007.00400.x
    • Moser, A., Korstjens, I., van der Weijden, T., & Tange, H. (2010b). Patient's decision making in selecting a hospital for elective orthopaedic surgery. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 16(6), 1262-1268. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2009.01311.x
    • Mukamel, D. B., & Spector, W. D. (2003). Quality report cards and nursing home quality. The Gerontologist, 43(suppl 2), 58-66. doi: 10.1093/geront/43.suppl_2.58
    • Neiboer, A. P. (2011). Choice processes and satisfaction with care according to parents of children and young adults with intellectual disability in the Netherlands. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 36(2), 127-136. doi: 10.1080/13668250.2011.573471 Netten, A., & Darton, R. (2003). The effect of financial incentives and access to services on self funded admissions to long term care. Social Policy & Administration, 37(5), 483-497. doi: 10.1111/1467-9515.00353
    • Ryan, A., McKenna, H., & Slevin, O. (2012). Family care-giving and decisions about entry to care: A rural perspective. Ageing & Society, 32(1), 1-18. doi: 10.1017/S0144686X11000055 Schwartz, B., Ben-Haim, Y., & Dacso, C. (2011). What makes a good decision? Robust satisficing as a normative standard of rational decision making. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 41(2), 209-227. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-5914.2010.00450.x
    • Shugarman, L., & Brown, J. (2007). Nursing home selection: How do consumers choose?: Volume I: Findings from focus groups of consumers and information intermediaries. Working paper http://192.5.14.43/content/dam/rand/pubs/working_papers/2007/RAND_WR457.2.pdf (last accessed: September 2012)
    • Stein, B. D., Kogan, J. N., Essock, S., & Fudurich, S. (2009). Views of mental health care consumers on public reporting of information on provider performance. Psychiatric Services (Washington, D.C.), 60(5), 689-692. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.60.5.689
    • Stevens, M., Glendinning, C., Jacobs, S., Moran, N., Challis, D., Manthorpe, J. and Wilberforce, M. (2011). Assessing the role of increasing choice in english social care services. Journal of Social Policy, 40, 257-274. doi: 10.1017/S004727941000111X
    • Stevenson, D. G. (2006). Is a public reporting approach appropriate for nursing home care? Journal of Health Politics, Policy & Law, 31(4), 773-810. doi: 10.1215/03616878-2006-003 Van Nie, N. C., Hollands, L. J. M., & Hamers, J. P. H. (2010). Reporting quality of nursing home care by an internet report card. Patient Education & Counseling, 78(3), 337-343. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2010.02.001
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article