Logo: to the web site of Uppsala University

Understanding and making data (re)usable requires adequate documentation of the data but also information on how it has been created, curated, manipulated and used, termed in data documentation literature as paradata. This paper reports results of a survey study (N=79) of data creating and (re)using archaeologists’ views of what data creation, curation, manipulation and use related information (termed here as paradata) they consider important when they are working with data. Data makers’ and users’ perceptions align to a considerable degree. It is important to have an explanation of the original context of data creation and to know the purpose, procedures and methods of data creation, analysis and documentation. The findings underline that there is a need to continue developing and testing ideas on how to capture and document paradata, and to find ways to help data makers adopt proven practices to facilitate this. Simultaneously, it is crucial that the paradata aimed at facilitating data use is relevant for data users rather than, for instance, technical or administrative details considered useful primarily by data makers.

Background: The emergence of eHealth services could contribute to improving individuals' quality of life by optimizing effective and efficient care. However, various challenges might limit some older adults' use of eHealth services.

Objective: This study aimed to understand the perspectives of older adults (aged >= 65 years) of different backgrounds regarding eHealth services. We explored the experiences of Iranian immigrant and nonimmigrant older adults with eHealth services to identify their perceived challenges, emotions, and wishes. Immigrants face more challenges, and there is a need to understand their perspectives in addition to those of nonimmigrants. Iranians are one important immigrant group, as their number is limited and their specific needs are less well understood compared to those of the bigger immigrant groups.

Methods: This study used a qualitative explorative research design. Semistructured interviews were conducted between February 2023 and May 2023. The participants were 25 older adults: nonimmigrants residing in cities (n=8, 32%), nonimmigrants residing in rural areas (n=9, 36%), and Iranian immigrants residing in cities (n=8, 32%). Data were analyzed through inductive and deductive content analysis and interpreted through self-determination theory.

Results: Interacting with eHealth services was challenging for some older adults. They perceived several difficulties, with the most obvious ones being related to values and preferences, as some older adults did not value eHealth services (16/25, 64%), had insufficient digital skills (15/25, 60%), and experienced usability issues (15/25, 60%). The first two challenges were more pronounced among immigrants. In contrast, nonimmigrants from cities, being more familiar with the services, shared more usability issues. These identified challenges prevented older adults from satisfying their basic psychological needs of being competent and autonomous users and having a sense of belonging (aspects of self-determination theory), which were the main source of negative emotions. A common negative feeling was confusion (16/25, 64%) among those with limited experience using smart devices and those with poor self-reported digital skills. Conversely, older adults' interaction with eHealth services generated positive emotions that were connected to the satisfaction of their basic psychological needs. Being interested in using eHealth services was a common feeling among most participants regardless of their background and was connected to satisfying their need for being competent and autonomous. The positive emotions could be supported by applying older adults' needs to the design of eHealth services (10/25, 40%) and by supporting their digital skills (19/25, 76%).

Conclusions: Some older adults value eHealth services and see their added benefits. However, various challenges limit their use of these services. The analysis of older adults' needs yielded several practical ideas that could improve the user-friendliness of the services and highlighted the importance of sufficient support services tailored to the cultural needs of specific groups of older adults.

Research on how people look for and interact with information has a long history in the information field. The current literature has been repeatedly reviewed in earlier volumes of Annual Review of Information Science and Technology. In this review, we offer an overview of the research published in this area in the years 2016–2022 with a focus on the trends that have emerged in this period. We use the term “information behavior” as an umbrella for the research area interested in how people become informed and engage with information in diverse manners acknowledging that different researchers and subfields prefer other terms and frameworks, including information practices, information experience, and health information seeking, to name a few. We reviewed 1270 articles in the field published in the years 2016–2022 and identified seven emerging trends: The CoVID-19 Pandemic, Diversity and Inclusion, Embodiment, Misinformation and Trust, Social Q&A Websites, Collaboration, and Information Creation. The reviewed literature and trends are discussed in relation to their significance for information, earlier review of information behavior research, and the long-debated issue of theory-driven versus atheoretical research in the field.

The Nordic countries are, together with the United States, forerunners in online record access (ORA), which has now become widespread. The importance of accessible and structured health data has also been highlighted by policy makers internationally. To ensure the full realization of ORA’s potential in the short and long term, there is a pressing need to study ORA from a cross-disciplinary, clinical, humanistic, and social sciences perspective that looks beyond strictly technical aspects. In this viewpoint paper, we explore the policy changes in the European Health Data Space (EHDS) proposal to advance ORA across the European Union, informed by our research in a Nordic-led project that carries out the first of its kind, large-scale international investigation of patients’ ORA—NORDeHEALTH (Nordic eHealth for Patients: Benchmarking and Developing for the Future). We argue that the EHDS proposal will pave the way for patients to access and control third-party access to their electronic health records. In our analysis of the proposal, we have identified five key principles for ORA: (1) the right to access, (2) proxy access, (3) patient input of their own data, (4) error and omission rectification, and (5) access control. ORA implementation today is fragmented throughout Europe, and the EHDS proposal aims to ensure all European citizens have equal online access to their health data. However, we argue that in order to implement the EHDS, we need more research evidence on the key ORA principles we have identified in our analysis. Results from the NORDeHEALTH project provide some of that evidence, but we have also identified important knowledge gaps that still need further exploration.

Objective: The current understanding of the breadth of individual differences in how eHealth technologies are perceived as useful for different purposes is incomprehensive. The aim/purpose of the study is to improve the understanding of diverse perceptions of the usefulness of technologies by exploring older adults’ use of their patient-accessible electronic health records (PAEHRs).

Methods: The study applies and extends Affordance Theory based on an empirical analysis of data from the NORDeHEALTH 2022 Patient Survey on attitudes toward PAEHR in Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Estonia. Responses from 3964 participants in Sweden, aged 65 + years were analysed. Data included demographics and agreement ratings to reasons for using PAEHR. To analyse variation in the reasons for using PAEHR, group comparisons were conducted based on gender (male/female), age group (65–74, 75–84 and 85+) and earlier encouragement to use PAEHR.

Results: Overall, the findings suggest that PAEHRs have multiple parallel affordance trajectories and affordance potencies that actualise differently depending on needs. The top reasons, pointing to both orientational and goal-oriented affordances for using PAEHR, were improving understanding of health issues, getting an overview of medical history/treatment and ensuring understanding of what the doctor said. Men reported more often sharing information with relatives or friends as a reason to access PAEHR. Women were more inclined, albeit similarly to men less frequently, to read their PAEHR for detecting errors. Age had little influence on reasons for using PAEHR.

Conclusions: The study applies and extends Affordance Theory in the context of older adults’ PAEHR use based on findings from the largest national investigation of reasons for older users to access PAEHR in Sweden demonstrating the applicability of the theory in improving the understanding of the diversity of individual perceptions on eHealth technologies.

To address the challenge of data process and practice descriptions, the aim of this volume is twofold. First, we propose the paradata concept as a method to think about and describe data, information, and knowledge processes and practices. Second, by inviting scholars and practitioners from a wide variety of disciplines, we explore how the paradata concept can be useful in and for information and knowledge management in a wide range of settings. The volume brings together scholars and practitioners from a broad range of subject areas, each offering a distinctive perspective on paradata in different contexts, highlighting diverse scenarios in which collection, extraction, and use of such data may prove constructive. The introductory chapter gives a brief history of the paradata term including insights into current research on the topic. Thereafter follows a concise contextualization of the study of paradata in the knowledge management tradition. The chapter is concluded by a guide to the volume’s chapters.

E-Health services are seen as promising to healthcare promotion, but low usage by patients limits their effectiveness. The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) has shown to be explanatory in the adoption of e-Health services. As the use of e-Health for self-management grows, it is important to identify factors influencing perceived ease-of-use (PEOU) and usefulness (PU) to encourage acceptance. However, the selection of external variables in this context lacks a clear pattern. We applied the Heuristic-Systematic Model (HSM) with the aim of further explaining the external variables in TAM especially in the area of e-health, and selected three external variables: information quality, health information literacy, and social influence. Hence, our study combines the Heuristic-Systematic Model (HSM) and TAM to investigate the mechanism and external factors that promote individuals to act for their health benefits. A total of 198 responses were collected among people having completed an online diabetes risk test on the website of the Finnish Diabetes Association. This data was then analyzed using partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Our study finds that heuristic cues like health information literacy and social influences impact PEOU, while systematic cues, especially information quality, positively influence PU. Also, higher PU is associated with increased intention to use e-Health services and engage in health-promoting actions, highlighting the importance of the systematic path in the e-Health context. Our theoretical contributions are twofold. First, we add to TAM research in the area of e-health by providing an explanation why heuristic cues link to PEOU while systematic cues link to PU. Second, our research is among very few applying HSM to e-health and finds that overall, the systematic path is more influential than the heuristic path. We also provide practical advice for healthcare providers to improve the impact of their e-health initiatives.

This concluding chapter draws together insights from the discipline-specific chapters to contrast and synthesise the diverse approaches to how the concept of paradata is conceptualised and used in the different cases covered in the volume “Perspectives to paradata”. Paradata as a concept that refers to process information resides firmly at the fringe of codified knowledge and organisational learning. Many different forms of information can function as paradata. There is a comparable variety in how the concept of paradata is understood. Due to the variety, having a unified definition can be debated. Major opportunities with paradata range from achieving reproducibility in data analysis and use and delivering the desired outcomes of the Open movement to increasing algorithmic and administrative accountability and transparency of artificial intelligence. However, transparency brought by paradata is not automatically virtuous. Paradata ethics and its relation to general information and knowledge management ethics is central to responsible use of paradata. Besides further inquiry into paradata concept, actual instances of paradata in the wild and how they are linked to social action, it is a key area that requires further research.

This is a 90-minute roundtable discussion, moderated by Shirin G. Alamdari. With Hannah Turner (UBC); Stacy Allison-Cassin (Dalhousie), Isto Huvila (UU), Andrea Thomer (UArizona) and Diana Marsh (UMD Maryland). The term, Cultural Heritage Informatics, is being used widely in Information fields and by Information Studies Scholars and programs. This panel will address the questions: What is Cultural Heritage Informatics? Why do researchers and institutions stumble with a definition? Does Cultural Heritage Informatics define a methodology, a subject interest, or a set of technical practices? What kinds of ethical considerations could we, or should we, have?

These days, everything from the every day choices we make to major scientific discoveries is increasingly relying on data. But how often do we stop and ask: Can we trust this data? How was it created? Who has changed it and how? Why should—or should not—we rely on it?