Category: National patient survey

DOME · eHealth · Medical Records Online · National patient survey

New article published about patients’ preferred ways of receiving bad health news in an era of digital health

Jonas MollLeave a comment

As I wrote in this blog post, a conference paper that was submitted to and presented at the The International Symposium for Health Information Management Research (ISHIMR 2020) was selected for publication in Health Informatics Journal. The journal version was recently published with the open access option and is available here! The title of the publication is “Do you want to receive bad news through your patient accessible electronic health record? A national survey on receiving bad news in an era of digital health”. My colleague Hanife Rexhepi from University of Skövde is the main author and the co-authors are, aside from me, Isto Huvila from Uppsala University and Rose-Mharie Åhlfeldt from University of Skövde. All of us are members of the DOME consortium and the NORDeHEALTH project.

The study presented in the article focuses on results from two questions in a large Swedish patient survey on patients’ attitudes towards and experiences with the patient accessible electronic health record service Journalen. The questions in focus were: “How do you receive bad news about your health from your health care provider?” and “How would you want to receive bad news about your health?” The response options were (short versions): “Phone”, “During visit”, “Physical letter”, “Journalen”, “Other”. The results were quite interesting, especially when it comes to the proportion of patients who received bad news by reading about them in Journalen (~2.0%) compared with the proportion of patients who want to receive bad news by reading about them in Journalen (~17.7%). There is a big difference here, even though the majority still wants to receive bad news via phone or during a visit. It is important to note here that patients who get notified about bad health news through Journalen have not yet discussed the results with e.g. a physician.

Even though healthcare professionals generally have a more positive attitude towards Journalen nowadays, physicians, especially within oncology, worry about patients finding out about bad health news on their own through this e-service. This is interesting to relate to the findings from the newly published study. We are definitely living in an era of digital health, and maybe this has changed, and will continue to change, how we want to receive bad news about our health.

Earlier today, a Swedish news article as well as a press release about the study was published by Örebro University. You can find the news article here.

I also want to mention the following article that was published in the same special issue in Health Informatics Journal (Hanife is first author even on this one, and Isto and Rose-Mharie co-authors!):

Here is the abstract of our newly published study:

Despite the fact that patient accessible electronic health records (PAEHRs) have been around for many years in several countries, there is a lack of research investigating patient’s preferences for receiving bad news, including through PAEHRs. Little is also known about the characteristics of the patients who prefer to receive bad news through the PAEHR in terms of, for example medical diagnosis, age and educational level. This study, based on a national patient survey in Sweden (N = 2587), investigated this. Results show that, generally, receiving bad news by reading in the PAEHR is still among the least preferred options. Additionally, a higher proportion of men want to receive bad news in the PAEHR compared to women (p = 0.001), and the same goes for those who are not working/have worked in healthcare (p = 0.007). An effect of disease groups was also found, showing that diabetes patients in particular, want to receive bad news through the PAEHR.

DOME · eHealth · Medical Records Online · National patient survey

New publication about age-related variations in the use of patient accessible electronic health records

Jonas Moll1 Comment

Around two months ago a new journal paper was published where I was one of the co-authors. The paper belongs to the quite large set of papers that are based on the national patient survey that I have been referring to multiple times in this blog. The title of this new paper is “Technological and informational frames: explaining age-related variation in the use of patient accessible electronic health records as technology and information” and it was published in the journal Information Technology & People.

In this paper we are comparing responses from the different age-groups Young (< 51 years), Older adults (51-66 years) and Elderly (>66 years), to investigate how the preference and use of patient accessible electronic health records (PAEHRs) and PAEHR information differ between them. We are also bringing in the theory of technological frames for the analysis. My DOME consortium colleague Isto Huvila is the main author and the other co-authors are Åsa Cajander, Heidi Enwald, Kristina Eriksson-Backa and Hanife Rexhepi.

The paper was published Open Access and you can find it here. You can find the abstract below. To recap, these are the national survey articles published prior to this one (follow the links to reach the Open Access articles):

And, last, here is the abstract from the most recently published article:

Purpose – Data from a national patient survey (N 5 1,155) of the Swedish PAEHR “Journalen” users were analysed, and an extended version of the theory of technological frames was developed to explain the variation in the technological and informational framing of information technologies found in the data.

Design/methodology/approach – Patient Accessible Electronic Health Records (PAEHRs) are implemented globally to address challenges with an ageing population. However, firstly, little is known about age-related variation in PAEHR use, and secondly, user perceptions of the PAEHR technology and the health record information and how the technology and information–related perceptions are linked to each other. The purpose of this study is to investigate these two under-studied aspects of PAEHRs and propose a framework based on the theory of technological frames to support studying the second aspect, i.e. the interplay of information and technology–related perceptions.

Findings – The results suggest that younger respondents were more likely to be interested in PAEHR contents for general interest. However, they did not value online access to the information as high as older ones. Older respondents were instead inclined to use medical records information to understand their health condition, prepare for visits, become involved in their own healthcare and think that technology has a much potential. Moreover, the oldest respondents were more likely to consider the information in PAEHRs useful and aimed for them but to experience the technology as inherently difficult to use.

Research limitations/implications – The sample excludes non-users and is not a representative sample of the population of Sweden. However, although the data contain an unknown bias, there are no specific reasons to believe that it would differently affect the survey’s age groups.

Practical implications – Age should be taken into account as a key factor that influences perceptions of the usefulness of PAEHRs. It is also crucial to consider separately patients’ views of PAEHRs as a technology and of the information contained in the EHR when developing and evaluating existing and future systems and information provision for patients.

Social implications – This study contributes to bridging the gap between information behaviour and systems design research by showing how the theory of technological frames complemented with parallel informational frames to provide a potentially powerful framework for elucidating distinct conceptualisations of (information) technologies and the information they mediate. The empirical findings show how information and information technology needs relating to PAEHRs vary according to age. In contrast to the assumptions  inmuch of the earlier work, they need to be addressed separately.

Originality/value – Few earlier studies focus on (1) age-related variation in PAEHR use and (2) user perceptions of the PAEHR technology and the health record information and how the technology and information–related perceptions are linked to each other.

DOME · eHealth · Medical Records Online · National patient survey

Another rewarding press release

Jonas MollLeave a comment

As I wrote in my previous blog post about my recently published article ”Online electronic healthcare records: Comparing the views of cancer patients and others”, a press release was about to be published by Örebro University. The press release (in Swedish) about the study was published yesterday morning and you can find it here. I have written before about the importance of publishing press releases and engage in other popular science activities – these activities can not only increase the visibility and accessibility of your research but also increase the possibility of the research being used in practice.

This particular press release was a little bit different than the earlier ones I have worked with. When I worked at Uppsala University as a postdoc researcher I (often in collaboration with research colleagues) wrote the press releases myself, which were then published by the university. But this time around I wrote a short draft and was then invited to a short interview with a representative from the press department. This resulted in the press release being based on quotes from the interview.

This particular press release had a very interesting effect. Just a few hours after it had been published on the university news page I got an email from the editor in chief of the national journal Onkologi i Sverige [Oncology in Sweden], who wanted me to write a short article in Swedish about the same study! We decided that I will do that and since it was ok with two authors I will collaborate with my colleague Hanife Rexhepi from University of Skövde who led the study together with me. This is of course an excellent opportunity to spread the results to a much larger audience so it is definitely worth the effort. The journal also published a version of the press release here. I will of course get back to this in later blog posts as the work progresses.

communication · DOME · eHealth · Medical Records Online · National patient survey

New article published about cancer patients’ attitudes towards and experiences with patient accessible electronic health records!

Jonas Moll2 Comments

A few days ago an article based on the national patient survey study on patient accessible electronic health records in Sweden was published in Health Informatics Journal. The article, “Online electronic healthcare records: Comparing the views of cancer patients and others” focuses on differences between cancer patients and other patient groups when it comes to attitudes towards and experiences with patient accessible electronic health records (PAEHRs). The areas covered in the article are, among others, involvement in the care process, communication with healthcare professionals and reasons for using PAEHRs. In total, 2587 patients answered the survey and 347 of the respondents had a cancer diagnosis. My colleague Hanife Rexhepi, from University of Skövde, led the work with this sub-study together with me. Our colleague Isto Huvila, from Uppsala University, also took part in the work.

In the article we present several findings from one of the very first large follow-up studies in Sweden about the effects of PAEHRs for cancer patients. Some of the key results are:

  • Cancer patients are generally very positive towards the possibilities that PAEHRs offer
  • Cancer patients use the PAEHR for getting an overview of their health status and for preparing for doctor’s visits to a significantly higher degree than other patients
  • Cancer patients experienced, to a significantly higher degree than other patients, that the PAEHR has helped them in their communication with medical staff
  • Cancer patients discuss the PAEHR and its content with medical staff to a significantly higher degree than other patients
  • Cancer patients experienced, to a significantly higher degree than other patients, that the PAEHR has a positive effect on their involvement in the care process.

The article is published open access here, where you can find more results and details about the study. As usual, a press release will also be published about the study – this time by Örebro University. If you want to read about some overall results from the national patient survey (not focusing on e.g. specific patient groups) I recommend you to read this open access publication. You can also read about results regarding effects of PAEHRs on the work environment of oncology healthcare professionals here.

Here is the recently published article’s abstract:

This study investigates differences in attitudes towards, and experiences with, online electronic health records between cancer patients and patients with other conditions, highlighting what is characteristic to cancer patients. A national patient survey on online access to electronic health records was conducted, where cancer patients were compared with all other respondents. Overall, 2587 patients completed the survey (response rate 0.61%). A total of 347 respondents (13.4%) indicated that they suffered from cancer. Results showed that cancer patients are less likely than other patients to use online electronic health records due to general interest (p < 0.001), but more likely for getting an overview of their health history (p = 0.001) and to prepare for visits (p < 0.001). Moreover, cancer patients rate benefits of accessing their electronic health records online higher than other patients and see larger positive effects regarding improved communication with and involvement in healthcare.

conference · DOME · eHealth · Medical Records Online · National patient survey

Getting ready to present at The International Symposium for Health Information Management Research (ISHIMR)!

Jonas MollLeave a comment

During early spring 2020 my colleague Hanife Rexhepi, from University of Skövde, submitted a paper to the 18th International Symposium for Health Information Management Research (ISHIMR 2020). The title of the paper is: “Do you want to receive bad news through your patient accessible electronic health record? A national survey on receiving bad news in an era of digital health”. I am a co-author together with Isto Huvila from Uppsala University and Rose-Mharie Åhlfeldt from University of Skövde (see blog picture above). We are all members of the national DOME consortium and have worked together many times before.

In the paper, which was accepted to the conference, we focus on results from a national patient survey on attitudes towards and experiences with patient accessible electronic health records. Questions of particular interest for this paper concerned means by which patients get bad news about their health and how they want to get such news, respectively. Interestingly enough we found, among other things, that a much higher proportion of patients want to receive bad news by reading online in the patient accessible electronic health record, than those that get bad health news in that way today. We found some significant differences when comparing demographic groups, but I will not go into any detail here, since the paper will be published open access after the conference (I will provide a link when it has become accessible.

The original idea was to have the conference on site in Kalmar, Sweden, September 17-18. But due to the Covid-19 pandemic it was decided in April that everything should move online. We are all getting used to online meeting and conference settings, so I’m sure it will work out in a good way. We actually had a kind of rehearsal (without complete presentations) just a few days ago to do some sound checks and try out the screen-sharing feature in Zoom. Most of us did not experience any problems. A few weeks ago Hanife and I also recorded a video with our presentation. Hopefully, we will be able to present live Friday next week, but in case we have technical problems they will show our video instead. After the conference I will write a new blog post where I will share that video!

You can find the complete conference program here including topics and titles of all papers. As you can see there, the paper I am co-authoring is not the only paper written by researchers from the DOME consortium. Diane Golay, who will have the very first presentation during the conference, is also a colleague of mine, from Uppsala University.

Here is the abstract of the paper I’m co-authoring and presenting:

Despite the fact that patient accessible electronic health records (PAEHRs) have been around for many years in several countries, there is a lack of research investigating patient´ preferences for receiving bad news, including through PAEHRs. Little is also known about the characteristics of the patients who prefer to receive bad news through the PAEHR in terms of e.g., medical diagnosis, age and educational level. This study, based on a national patient survey in Sweden (N=2587), investigated this. Results show that, generally, receiving bad news by reading in the PAEHR is still among the least preferred options. Additionally, a higher proportion of men want to receive bad news in the PAEHR compared to women (p=0.001) and the same goes for those who are not working/have worked in healthcare (p=0.007). An effect of disease groups was also found, showing that diabetes patients in particular want to receive bad news through the PAEHR.

conference · DOME · eHealth · Medical Records Online · National patient survey · Pedagogy

Got three conference contributions accepted this week!

Jonas Moll1 Comment

Swans

I just ended this year’s last week at Örebro University and it was quite an interesting week when it comes to research output – three conference contributions were accepted! Early Tuesday morning I got a notification from the International Technology, Education and Development Conference (INTED) that an abstract that I wrote with Pernilla Josefsson was accepted. The title of the abstract is “COMMUNICATION PATTERNS AMONG STUDENTS AND TEACHERS WHEN USING FACEBOOK IN A UNIVERSITY COURSE” and it focuses on experiences from using a teacher-administrated Facebook group in a university course in human-computer interaction. An accepted abstract means that an oral presentation during the conference is guaranteed. It also means that the authors get the possibility to write a full paper and I spent some time during the week to write a draft. Unfortunately, the deadline for submitting a paper is January 9th, so the time is very limited and I definitely need some days off work now. Anyway, I’m very happy about being able to visit my first international pedagogical conference!

Two days after the good news from INTED, I got notifications from the Medical Informatics Europe conference (MIE) that both my submitted full papers were accepted! The first one, which I wrote together with Hanife Rexhepi from the University of Skövde has the title “The Effect of Patient Accessible Electronic Health Records on Communication and Involvement in Care – a National Patient Survey in Sweden” and is based on results from the national patient survey which I have written about many times before on this blog. The other paper, which I wrote together with Åsa Cajander from Uppsala University has the title “On Patient Accessible Electronic Health Records and the Experienced Effect on the Work Environment of Nurses” and is based on results from interviews with physicians and nurses at Uppsala University Hospital. We now have around two weeks (until January 7th) to update the papers in response to the reviewers’ comments.

I’m quite excited about getting the above conference contributions accepted since that means a 100% hit rate on conference abstracts/papers (INTED and MIE), journal articles (Health Informatics Journal) and funding applications (Vinnova) since I started working as an assistant professor at Örebro University. Let’s see how long this lasts!

(I used one of my own nature pictures, taken at my countryside, as the blog image)

DOME · eHealth · Medical Records Online · National patient survey · Popular science

Our eHealth studies are covered in the news again!

Jonas MollLeave a comment

Health Informatics Journal

As I wrote in this earlier blog post, Åsa Cajander and I recently got a new eHealth study published on the effect of patient accessible electronic health records on the work environment of oncology care professionals (see blog image). You can find the open access article here. This press release was published around the same time and the intention was of course to spread our results to the general public. Our hope was that journalists from e.g. popular science journals would find the content of the press release interesting and publish their own versions.

Although this study does not seem to have generated the same interest as in this and this case, there is at least one popular science article published about our new study. That article was published in the journal Vårdfokus, which is a monthly journal for the members of The Swedish Association of Health Professionals (they also publish articles on a daily bases online, reaching a larger audience). The main focus of this popular science article is that there is indeed some more work and changed routines as a consequence of patients being able to access their medical records online, even though the effects were not as large as originally feared.

The article in Vårdfokus, which you can find here (in Swedish), is definitely inspired by our press release, but has a somewhat different focus. The journalist also contacted Åsa Cajander before writing the article, to discuss the study! The article ends with the following quote from Åsa:

These results nevertheless show that there were not as large effects on the work of the healthcare professionals as compared to the enormous concerns that existed when Journalen was introduced. But certainly both physicians and nurses have had to adapt, especially when it comes to how and what they document.

In the article in Vårdfokus there is also a link to another article which they have written about two of our earlier eHealth studies. Aside from combining one study on the patients’ perspective (the national patient survey) and one study on the professionals’ perspective (on effects of patient accessible electronic health records on perceived risks of threats and violence), they also include quotes from an interview with Åsa!

conference · DISA · DOME · eHealth · Medical Records Online · National patient survey

Two papers submitted to Medical Informatics Europe 2020!

Jonas MollLeave a comment

MIE2020_submit

During August and September I have been working on two papers for the annual conference Medical Informatics Europe, together with colleagues from Uppsala University and University of Skövde, respectively. Next year’s version of the conference will be held in Geneva, Switzerland, April 28 – May 1. I will mention the papers briefly in this blog post, since they are not subject to a blind review. I will write more about them in later posts when they have (hopefully) been accepted. I’m the main author of both papers.

Both papers are based on data that were gathered while I was working as a postdoctoral researcher at Uppsala University. One of the papers, written together with Åsa Cajander from Uppsala University, is based on interview results from the large interview/survey/observation study on patient accessible electronic health records (PAEHRs) presented in this blog post. In this paper we focus on the effect of PAEHR on nurses’ work.

The other paper, written together with Hanife Rexhepi from University of Skövde, is based on results from the national patient survey which I introduced in this blog post. The focus in this case is on the effect of PAEHR on communication with medical professionals and on involvement in the care process.

This is the second time I contribute with papers to a MIE conference – the first time was in 2018 when MIE was held in parallel with Vitalis. That time around I was co-author of two papers and responsible for a workshop. I wrote about the presentation of one of the papers, also focusing on the effect of PAEHR on nurses’ work, in this blog post. In this blog post I write about the presentation of the other paper, focusing on differences between county councils/regions in Sweden when it comes to access to information in the PAEHR. You can read about our workshop, on the use of patient data for diagnoses and treatment of cancer, in this blog post.

I really enjoyed attending the MIE conference last time, and I’m positive it will be a nice experience this time around as well. The deadline for full paper (5 pages) submissions was recently postponed until October 15, so there is still time to submit research contributions to the conference!

 

DOME · eHealth · Grant application · Medical Records Online · National patient survey · Popular science · Uppsala Health Summit

Overview of my research within eHealth

Jonas Moll2 Comments

Journalen

Since I am still very much on a planning stage regarding the research I will perform during my recently started assistant professorship at Örebro University, I will take the opportunity to write a few posts about the research I have performed and what is currently going on. I will start by discussing research within the eHealth domain.

What have I done related to eHealth?

Those who have followed this blog during the latest years already know about my research on patient accessible electronic health records (PAEHRs), which I conducted during my time as a postdoc at Uppsala University. You can read a short summary about my two major studies (a national patient survey and an interview/survey study with clinicians at Uppsala University Hospital), submitted grant applications and conference activities in this blog post.

In total, my research on eHealth has, up until today, resulted in the following two journal publications (links lead to the open access articles):

and the following seven conference proceedings (most of the links lead to open access publications):

The work within the eHealth domain has also resulted in the following popular science publications (and some other news coverage, which you can read about here and here):

To sum up, my research within this domain, up until today, has focused on PAEHRs and their effects for patients and healthcare professionals.

My ongoing research within the eHealth domain

I am currently involved in quite a few ongoing research activities related to eHealth, especially when it comes to pushing journal manuscripts through the peer-review process.

When it comes to data gathering and analysis, there is still a lot of work to do in the large interview/survey study at the Oncology department at Uppsala University Hospital that I mentioned before. For many different reasons we were not able to conduct all the 20 interviews with nurses that we had planned. Around 10 more interviews need to be performed. When it comes to the physicians, the data gathering is complete and we are working with the analysis. My hope is that we will be able to submit a first overview article about those interviews in late autumn 2019 or early spring 2020. Specific theme articles are also planned, but they require a more in-depth analysis. The articles based on this study will be very important for research on patient accessible electronic health records in Sweden, since this is the first large follow-up study in Sweden regarding long-term effects of PAEHR on the work environment of healthcare professionals.

When it comes to the national patient survey all data gathering is completed, but there are still some themes from the survey that we want to look into in more depth. These include information literacy, computer security and comparisons between different disease groups.

I’m currently working on some journal publications together with colleagues in the DOME consortium. One of these articles reports on findings from the survey on the effect of PAEHR on the work environment of healthcare professionals, distributed to physicians and nurses at the Oncology department at Uppsala University Hospital. I expect this article to be published quite soon (a minor revision is about to be submitted back to the journal), so there will be a publication and, of course, a press release coming up pretty soon. One journal manuscript focusing on sharing health records is currently in the first review round and two journal manuscripts based on the patient survey, focusing on cancer and psychiatry patients, respectively, can be submitted to journals quite soon.

Upcoming research on eHealth

As I said in the beginning of this post, I’m very much on the planning stage when it comes to future research. There are a few activities, however, that I’m sure I will be working with during the upcoming months (these will get their own blog posts later on):

  • Currently, it seems that I will submit at least two conference articles to next year’s version of Medical Informatics Europe. The deadline for submissions is September 1st, but on the other hand there is a scope limit on five pages. One article will be about results from the interview/survey study with healthcare professionals and the other will focus on results from the patient survey.
  • Quite soon, I will take the lead on a more theoretical journal article, focusing on the role of the PAEHR as a communication mediator in healthcare.
  • The above-mentioned article is directly related to a research grant application which is currently being reviewed by the Swedish Research Council (VR) – if the application is accepted I will finally get the opportunity to lead my very own research project!
  • There is also another grant application, related to psychiatry records online, which is currently being reviewed by the Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare. 2020 can be a very interesting year, indeed!
Academic writing · conference · DOME · eHealth · Grant application · Human-Computer Interaction · Medical Records Online · National patient survey · Pedagogy · Social media in higher education

Looking back at my two years as a postdoc at Uppsala University, part 1: research

Jonas Moll2 Comments

Gåsflock1

Since my two years as a postdoc at Uppsala University ended September 28, I will try to summarize my results and experiences in a few blog posts before this year ends. I will start today by writing about my research activities. I took the blog picture during my last birdwatching trip to Öland.

Even though most of my research activities during the postdoc period were focused on eHealth, I also did some work related to multimodal communication and pedagogy. Thus, I was active within all of my main research fields. In total, I got one journal article published, two journal articles accepted, one book chapter published and 11 conference papers published. I also attended nine conferences and submitted two research grant applications as main applicant.

Research within eHealth

Within this field I led two major studies related to patient accessible electronic health records (PAEHRs). The interview/observation/survey study at Uppsala University Hospital, which I introduce here, focuses on the effect of PAEHRs on physicians’ and nurses’ work environment. The survey part is completed and a journal manuscript, written by me and Åsa Cajander, was submitted to Health Informatics Journal slightly after my postdoc period had ended. The results are really interesting and I will of course get back to them when the article has been published. Due to some health issues and logistical difficulties, we have only conducted about half of the planned interviews with physicians and nurses, but we will hopefully get the majority of the remaining ones during the first months of the spring term. The analysis of the already performed physician interviews are still ongoing, and it’s very clear that the material that we already have will give many new insights into long-term effect of PAEHR on the work environment of healthcare professionals. This has really been an interesting study and it was also the first study for which I got the opportunity to write an ethical application. It has also been quite a challenge to coordinate the work with nine colleagues from five different universities.

The other major study I was leading was the national patient survey, which I introduce here. I have written about it many times on this blog since it has resulted in several scientific publications as well as presentations. Even in this case, one of the toughest challenges has been to coordinate the work in the distributed project team. This study has already resulted in one journal article and three conference papers and we are currently working with several journal article manuscripts which I will get back to later on. I really enjoy this study and I will keep working with it until everything is published. The study is very important since it’s the first major follow-up study on patients’ attitudes towards and experiences with PAEHRs.

During my time as a postdoc I also took part in the work with two research grant applications, as a co-applicant, within this research area. One of them was an EU grant application led by Meena Daivadanam at Karolinska University Hospital, with the title “The ENGAGE Trial: Improving and health societal outcomes for comorbid mental disorders associated with type 2 diabetes through an integrated support and engagement platform in Uganda and Sweden”. It was an interesting process with many Skype meetings (extremely early in the morning since one participant was in Australia) and a lot of interesting discussions. Unfortunately, we did not get the grant. As I understand it we were one point from getting it. The other research grant application concerned psychiatry records online. My DOME consortium colleague Gunilla Myreteg was the main applicant of this AFA insurances application focusing on implementation and short term effects of psychiatry records online in Region Uppsala. We did not get that grant either, but we are definitely not giving up!

I also attended several conferences related to eHealth during my postdoc period. I really enjoyed participating in and presenting at Vitalis 2017 and Vitalis/MIE (Medical Informatics Europe) 2018. There were so many interesting presentations and taking part in the 1.5 hours DOME arrangements was great! You can see my summary of the Vitalis 2017 version of the DOME session here. At Vitalis/MIE 2018 I was actually active with own presentations and a workshop during each of the three conference days, which was a little tiresome. You can read about that here. My very first conference experience during my postdoc was actually one of the most interesting ones, since I participated as a patient for the very first time! You can read about my contribution here. A few months later I actually got the opportunity to act as a patient once again – this time in a role play at the conference “EHealth in Norway Future Health”! That was a really interesting experience for me both from a patient’s and a researcher’s perspective. You can read about my experiences from this episode here. I really hope that I will get the chance to contribute to research from the patient’s perspective again!

 

Research within multimodal communication

My very few research activities within this subject area were mostly related to research grant applications. During spring 2017 I submitted a VR grant application, with five co-applicants from four universities in Sweden. The application focused on collaboration between deafblind and sighted pupils in a school setting, and more specifically on how multimodal learning environments can support this collaboration. Writing this grant application was a great learning experience! In the end, we did not get this grant but we still got good ratings (“Very good” on all aspects that related to the scientific content). You can read more about my experiences in this blog post. The other grant application was actually a draft which I submitted to Forte during spring 2018. It focused on multimodal learning environments for collaboration between sighted and visually impaired pupils. Unfortunately, the draft was not accepted. After the postdoc ended I wrote another application on this topic as main applicant, but I will cover that in another blog post.

I also got one journal article published in this research field, “Haptic feedback combined with movement sonification using a friction sound improves task performance in a virtual throwing task.” The article presents results from an experiment conducted at KTH right before my postdoc period began. The experiment was extensive and included eye-tracking and different combinations of haptic and audio feedback. I will write more about this study in a later blog post. A few conference papers on results from the eye-tracking analysis have also been published.

 

Research within pedagogy

I also conducted research related to pedagogy and more specifically on the effects of using social media as complementary communication channels in higher education courses. The most important thing I worked on was a short book chapter which was published in the book “Digitalisering av högre utbildning” [Digitalization of higher education] about a month before my postdoc ended. I really enjoyed working on this chapter, together with co-author Pernilla Josefsson, where I contribute with my experiences of using Twitter as one of the communication channels in a university course in engineering communication. This is my very first contribution to teacher education! You can read about the chapter, and find a link to the book, here.

We also contributed with a poster describing a later study on using a teacher-administrated Facebook-group as a complementary communication channel in a course in human-computer interaction. I will write more about this in my next blog post about my postdoc period, since the poster was based on work performed in a pedagogical course I took. Last, I collaborated with several authors when writing a conference paper about a critical incident from the 2017 version of a master course in human-computer interaction. You can read about the paper here.