BazEkon - Biblioteka Główna Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Krakowie

BazEkon home page

Meny główne

Trigo Alexandre (University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain)
Innovation in the Era of Experience : the Changing Role of Users in Healthcare Innovation
Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation (JEMI), 2016, vol. 12, nr 2, s. 29-51, rys., bibliogr. s. 42-51
Tytuł własny numeru
Innovation in Services or Industry and Entrepreneurial Intention
Słowa kluczowe
Innowacje, Opieka zdrowotna, Innowacyjność, Innowacje w opiece zdrowotnej
Innovations, Health care, Innovative character, Innovations in healthcare
streszcz., summ.
Artykuł zawiera obszerny przegląd literatury na temat zmieniającej się roli użytkowników w zakresie innowacji, ze szczególnym naciskiem na sektor opieki zdrowotnej. Użytkownicy zostali szczegółowo przeanalizowani przez wielu badaczy na całym świecie ze względu na ich istotną rolę jako źródła innowacji, wykraczającą poza tradycyjne założenie, które postrzega klientów jako zwykłych i pasywnych użytkowników produktów i usług. Zwiększająca się liczba, ale wciąż niewystarczająca, wielu badań na ten temat, wykazała korzyści z zaangażowania pacjenta oraz jak bliski i stały związek między pacjentami a lekarzami może prowadzić do trwałych cykli ulepszeń i innowacji w zakresie skutków zdrowotnych. Oprócz podejścia zorientowanego na użytkownika, innowacyjni pacjenci aktywnie rozwijają nowe rozwiązania dla ich własnego leczenia, podobnie jak w przypadku innych pacjentów z podobnymi chorobami. (abstrakt oryginalny)

This article provides an extensive literature review on the changing role of users in innovation, with a particular focus on the healthcare sector. Users have been specifically analyzed by many scholars worldwide due to their significant role as a source of innovation beyond the traditional assumption which considers customers as mere passive adopters of products and services. The increasing, but still scarce, number of studies on this topic has demonstrated the benefits of patient involvement and how a close and continuous relationship between patients and practitioners can lead to permanent cycles of improvements and innovation in healthcare outcomes. In addition to a user-centered approach, innovative patients are actively developing new solutions for their own treatments, likewise for other patients with similar diseases. (original abstract)
Pełny tekst
  1. Ali, K., Roffe, C., & Crome, P. (2006). What patients want: Consumer involvement in the design of a randomized controlled trial of routine oxygen supplementation after acute stroke. Stroke, 37(3), 865-871.
  2. Arundel, A., & Sonntag, V. (1999). Patterns of Advanced Manufacturing Technology (AMT) Use in Canadian Manufacturing: 1998 AMT Survey Results. Science, Innovation and Electronic Information Division Research Paper No. 12. Ottawa: Statistics Canada.
  3. Baldwin, C.Y., & von Hippel, E. (2011). Modeling a Paradigm Shift: From Producer Innovation to User and Open Collaborative Innovation. Organization Science, 22(6), 1399-1417.
  4. Baumol, W. (1967). Macroeconomics of unbalanced growth: The anatomy of urban crisis. The American Economic Review, 57(3), 416-426.
  5. Biemans, W.G. (1991). User and third-party in developing medical equipment innovations. Technovation, 11(3), 163-182.
  6. Bisgaard, T., & H0genhaven, C. (2010). Creating new concepts, products and services with user driven innovation. Oslo, Norway: Nordic Innovation Centre (NICe).
  7. Bower, J. (2005). From the 'Rhetoric of Hope' to the 'Patient-active Paradigm': Strategic Positioning of Pharmaceutical and Biotechnology Companies. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 17(2), 183-204.
  8. Broerse, J., & Bunders, J. (2000). Requirements forbiotechnologydevelopment: The necessity of an interactive and participatory innovation process. International journal of biotechnology, 2(4), 275-296
  9. Brown, T.C.Jr., Werling, K.A., Walker, B.C., Burgdorfer, R.J., & Shields, J.J. (2012). Current trends in hospital mergers and acquisitions. Healthcare Financial Management, 66(3), 114-118, 120.
  10. Buckley, B., Grant, A., Firkins, L., Greene, A., & Frankau, J. (2007). Working together to identify research questions. Continence, 1(1), 76-81.
  11. Callon, M. (1991). Techno-economic networks and irreversibility. In Law, J. (Ed.), A sociology of monsters: essays on power, technology and domination. London, England: Routledge, 132-161.
  12. Callon, M. (1994). Is Science a Public Good?. Science, Technology and Human Values, 19(4), 395-424.
  13. Cambrosio, A., Keating, P., Mercier, S., Lewison, G., & Mogoutov, A. (2006). Mapping the emergence and development of translational cancer research. European Journal of Cancer, 42(18), 3140-3148.
  14. Caron-Flinterman, J.F., Broerse, J.E., & Bunders, J.F. (2005). The experiential knowledge of patients: a new resource for biomedical research?. Social Science & Medicine, 60(11), 2575-2584.
  15. Chesbrough, H. (2003). Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press.
  16. Chesbrough, H. (2011). Open Services Innovation: Rethinking Your Business to Grow and Compete in a New Era. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
  17. Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W., & West, J. (Eds.). (2006). Open Innovation: Researching a New Paradigm. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.
  18. Christensen, J. L., & Lundvall, B.-Á. (Eds.). (2004). Product Innovation, Interactive Learning and Economic Performance. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier.
  19. Clark M., Glasby J., & Lester H. (2004). Cases for change: User involvement in mental health services and research. Research Policy and Planning, 22(2), 31-38.
  20. Collins, H. (1974). The TEA set: Tacit knowledge and scientific networks. Science Studies, 4, 165-186.
  21. Consoli, D., & Mina A. (2009) An evolutionary perspective on the dynamics of Health Innovation Systems. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 19(2), 297-319.
  22. Consoli, D., & Ramlogan, R. (2009). Scope, Strategy and Structure: The Dynamics of Knowledge Networks in Medicine. Manchester Business School Working Paper Number 569, University of Manchester.
  23. Danzon, P. M., & Towse, A. (2003). Differential Pricing for Pharmaceuticals: Reconciling Access, R&D and Patents. International Journal of Health Care Finance and Economics, 3(3), 183-205.
  24. de Jong, J.P.J., & von Hippel, E. (2009). Transfers of user process innovations to process equipment producers: A study of Dutch high-tech firms. Research Policy, 38(7), 1181-1191.
  25. Demonaco, H.J., Ayfer, A., & von Hippel, E. (2006). The Major Role of Clinicians in the Discovery of Off-Label Drug Therapies, Pharmacotherapy, 26(3), 323-332.
  26. Deshpande, P.R., Rajan, S., Sudeepthi, B.L., & Abdul Nazir, C.P. (2011). Patient-reported outcomes: a new era in clinical research. Perspectives in clinical research, 2(4), 137-144.
  27. Donovan, J., Mills, N., Smith, M., Brindle, L., Jacoby, A., Peters, T., Frankel, S., Neal, D., & Hamdy, F. (2002). Quality improvement report: Improving design and conduct of randomised trials by embedding them in qualitative research: ProtecT (prostate testing for cancer and treatment) study. British Medical Journal, 325(7367), 766-770. doi: http://dx.doi. org/10.1136/bmj.325.7367.766.
  28. Echeverri, P., Skalén, P., Hjalmarson, H., Gäre, B.A., Svensson, H., Henriks, G., Hellström, A., & Elg, M. (2013). Patient involvement for service innovation - An agenda for research and innovation in healthcare and social service. Service Research Center, Karlstad University. Retrieved from
  29. Edquist, C. (Ed.). (1997). Systems of Innovations. London, United Kingdom: Pinter Publishers.
  30. Etzkowitz, H. and Leydesdorff, L. (Eds.) (1997). Universities in the Global Economy: A Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations. London, United Kingdom: Cassell Academic.
  31. European Commission (2007). Innobarometer 2007. Brussels, Belgium: DG Enterprise and Industry.
  32. European Commission (2009). Innobarometer 2009. Brussels, Belgium: DG Enterprise and Industry.
  33. European Commission (2012). Eurobarometer Qualitative Study, Patient Involvement: Aggregate Report, Brussels, Belgium: DG COMM R&S Unit.
  34. Flowers, S., Sinozic, T., & Patel, P. (2009). Prevalence of User Innovation in the EU: Analysis based on the Innobarometer Surveys of 2007 and 2009. INNO-Metrics Thematic Paper.
  35. Folland, S., Goodman, A.C., & Stano, M. (2007). The Economics of Health and Health Care (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
  36. Food and Drug Administration (2015). Mobile Medical Applications: Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff. Retrieved from
  37. Franke, N., & Shah, S. (2003). How Communities Support Innovative Activities: An Exploration of Assistance and Sharing among End-Users. Research Policy, 32(1), 157-178.
  38. Franke, N., von Hippel, E., & Schreier, M. (2006). Finding Commercially Attractive User Innovations: A Test of Lead User Theory. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 23(4), 301-315.
  39. Freeman, C. (1987a). Factor Substitution and the Instability of Growth. Paper prepared for a Symposium at the Institute of Statistical Research, Tokyo, Japan on 23rd and 24th September 1987.
  40. Freeman, C. (1987b). Technology and Economic Performance: Lessons from Japan. London, United Kingdom: Pinter Publishers.
  41. Freeman, C. (1995). The National System of Innovation in Historical Perspective. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19(1), 5-24.
  42. Goeldner, M., & Herstatt, C. (2016). Are Patients and Relatives the Better Innovators? The case of medical smartphone applications. Institute for Technology and Innovation Management Working Paper Number 91, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH).
  43. Gomes- Casseres, B. (2003). Competitive advantage in alliance constellations. Strategic Organization, 1(3), 327- 335.
  44. Grabowski, H. (2003). Patents and new product development in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries. The Georgetown Public Policy Review, 8(2), 7-23.
  45. Grabowski, H. G., & Vernon, J.M. (1990). A new look at the returns and risks to pharmaceutical R&D. Management Science, 36(7), 804-821.
  46. Griffiths K.M., Jorm A.F., & Christensen H. (2004). Academic consumer researchers: A bridge between consumers and researchers. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 38(4), 191-196.
  47. Habicht, H., Oliveira, P., & Shcherbatiuk, V. (2012). User Innovators: When Patients Set Out to Help Themselves and End Up Helping Many. Die Unternehmung, 66(3), 277- 294.
  48. Hanley B., Truesdale A., King A., Elbourne D., & Chalmers I. (2001). Involving consumers in designing, conducting, and interpreting randomized controlled trials: Questionnaire survey. British Medical Journal, 322 (7285), 519-523. doi:
  49. Hara, T. (2003). Innovation in the Pharmaceutical Industry: the process of drug discovery and development. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publications.
  50. Herstatt, C., & von Hippel, E. (1992). From Experience: Developing New Product Concepts via the Lead User Method. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 9(3), 213-222.
  51. IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics (2013). Patient apps for improved healthcare: From novelty to mainstream. Parsippany, NJ, IMS Institute.
  52. Jensen, M. B., Johnson, B., Lorenz, E., & Lundvall, B.-Á. (2007). Forms of Knowledge and modes of innovation. Research Policy, 36(5), 680-693.
  53. Kent A. (2002). Patients + research = result! the role of patients and their interest groups in biomedical research. EMBO Reports, 3(8), 707-708. doi: 10.1093/embo-reports/kvf166.
  54. Kent A., & Oosterwijk C. (2007). A patient and family perspective on gene therapy for rare diseases. Journal of Gene Medicine, 9(10), 922-923. doi: 10.1002/jgm.1097.
  55. Kielstra, P. (2009). Doctor Innovation: Shaking Up the Health System. Economist Intelligence Unit. Retrieved from marketing/pdf/Philips_Shaking_up.pdf
  56. Kline, S. J., & Rosenberg, N. (1986). An overview of innovation. In Landau, R., & Rosenberg, N. (Eds.), The Positive sum strategy: harnessing technology for economic growth (pp. 275-305). Washington D.C.: National Academy Press.
  57. Lamattina, J. L. (2011). The impact of mergers on pharmaceutical R&D. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, 10, 559-560. doi:10.1038/nrd3514
  58. Lebrecht, A. (2015). Past Trends and Future Forecasts in a Volatile Healthcare Market. Poster presented at LVHN Research Scholar Program Poster Session, Lehigh Valley Health Network, Allentown, PA. Retrieved from xt=research-scholars- posters
  59. Leonard-Barton, D. (1992). Core capabilities and core rigidities: a paradox in managing new product development. Strategic Management Journal, 13(S1), 111-125. doi: 10.1002/smj.4250131009
  60. Lester, H., Tait, L., England, E., & Tritter, J. (2006). Patient involvement in primary care mental health: a focus group study. British Journal of General Practice, 56(527), 415-422.
  61. Lettl, C., & Gemünden, H. G. (2005). The entrepreneurial role of innovative users. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 20(7), 339-346. doi: 10.1108/08858620510628579
  62. Leydesdorff, L., & Meyer, M. (2006). Triple Helix indicators of knowledge-based innovation systems: introduction to the special issue. Research Policy, 35(10), 1441-1449.
  63. Liebeskind, J. P., Oliver, A. L., Zucker, L., & Brewer, M. (1996). Social networks, learning, and flexibility: Sourcing scientific knowledge in new biotechnology firms. Organization Science, 7(4), 428-443.
  64. Lundvall, B.-Á. (1985). Product Innovation and User-Producer Interaction. Aalborg, Denmark: Aalborg University Press.
  65. Lundvall, B.-Á. (1988). Innovation as an interactive process: from user-producer interaction to the national system of innovation. In Dosi, G. Freeman, C., Nelson, R., Silverberg, G., & Soete, L. (Eds.), Technical Change and Economic Theory (pp. 349-369). London, United Kingdom: Pinter Publishers.
  66. Lundvall, B.-Á. (2007). National Innovation System: analytical focusing device and policy learning tool, Working Paper R2007:004. Östersund, Sweden: ITPS - Swedish Institute for Growth Policy Studies.
  67. Lundvall, B.-Á. (Ed.). (1992). National System of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. London, United Kingdom: Pinter Publishers.
  68. Lüthje, C. (2003). Customers as Co-Inventors: An Empirical Analysis of the Antecedents of Customer-Driven Innovations in the Field of Medical Equipment. Proceedings of the 32th EMAC Conference. Glasgow, Scotland.
  69. Lüthje, C. (2004). Characteristics of Innovating Users in a Consumer Goods Field: An Empirical Study of Sport-related Product Consumers. Technovation, 24(9), 683-695.
  70. Lüthje, C., Herstatt, C., & von Hippel, E. (2005). User-innovators and "local" information: The case of mountain biking. Research Policy, 34 (6), 951965.
  71. Mccormick, S., Brody, J., Brown, P., & Polk, R. (2004). Public involvement in breast cancer research: An analysis and model for future research. International Journal of Health Services, 34(4), 625-646.
  72. Metcalfe, J.S. (1995). The Economic Foundations of Technology Policy: Equilibrium and Evolutionary Perspective. In Stoneman, P. (Ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation and Technological Change (pp. 409-512). London, United Kingdom: Blackwell.
  73. Metcalfe, J.S. (2003). Equilibrium and Evolutionary Foundations of Competition and Technology Policy: New perspectives on the Division of Labour and the Innovation Process. Revista Brasileira de Inovaęao, 2(1),111- 146.
  74. Minogue V., Boness J., Brown A., & Girdlestone J. (2005). The impact of service user involvement in research. International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance, 18(2), 103-112.
  75. Mittra, J. (2016). The New Health Bioeconomy: R&D Policy and Innovation for the Twenty-first Century. Basingstoke, United Kingdom: Palgrave Macmillan.
  76. Munos, B. (2009). Lessons from 60 years of pharmaceutical innovation. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, 8, 959-968.
  77. National Institute for Health Research (2009). Involving patients and the public in medical research: A guide for staff. Retrieved from http://www. staffguide.pdf
  78. National Institute for Health Research (2010). Involving Users in the research process: A how to guide for researchers. Retrieved from http://www.rds-
  79. Nelson, R. R. (Ed.). (1993). National innovation systems: a comparative analysis. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
  80. Oliveira, P., & von Hippel, E. (2011). Users as Service Innovators: The Case of Banking Services. Research Policy, 40(6), 806-818.
  81. Oliveira, P., Zejnilovic, L., Canhäo, H., & von Hippel, E. (2015). Innovation by patients with rare diseases and chronic needs. Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, 10(41). doi: 10.1186/s13023-015-0257- 2
  82. Oliver, A. L. (2001). Strategic Alliances and the Learning Life-cycle of Biotechnology Firms. Organization Studies, 22(3), 467-487.
  83. Orsenigo, L., Pammolli, F., & Riccaboni, M. (2001). Technological change and network dynamics: Lessons from the pharmaceutical industry. Research Policy, 30(3), 485-508.
  84. Pammolli, F., Magazzini, L., & Riccaboni, M. (2011). The productivity crisis in pharmaceutical R&D. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, 10, 428- 438.
  85. Polanyi, M. (1967). The tacit dimension. London, United Kingdom: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
  86. Powell, W.W. (1990). Neither market nor hierarchy: network forms of organization. Research in Organizational Behavior, 12, 295- 336.
  87. Powell, W.W., & Grodal, S. (2005). Networks of innovators. In: Fagerberg, J., Mowery, D.C., Nelson, R.R. (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation (pp. 56-85). Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.
  88. Powell, W.W., Koput, K., & Smith-Doerr, L. (1996). Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: networks of learning in Biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(1), 116-145.
  89. Powell, W.W., White, D.R., Koput, K.W., & Owen-Smith, J. (2005). Network dynamics and field evolution: the growth of inter-organizational collaboration in the life sciences. American Journal of Sociology, 110(4), 1132-1205.
  90. Prahalad, C.K., & Hamel, G. (1990). The Core Competence of the Corporation. Harvard Business Review, 68(3), 79-91.
  91. Quéré, M. (2004). The post-genome era: rupture in the organization of the life science industry?. In McKelvey, M., Rickne A. & J. Laage- Hellman (Eds.), The economic dynamics of modern biotechnology (pp.76-98). Cheltenham, United Kingdom: Edward Elgar.
  92. Rabeharisoa, V. (2003). The struggle against neuromuscular diseases in France and the emergence of the "partnership model" of patient organization. Social Science & Medicine, 57(11), 2127-2136.
  93. Rai, Arti K. (2005). Open and Collaborative Research: A New Model for Biomedicine. Intellectual Property Rights in Frontier Industries, 131-158, Duke University School of Law. Retrieved from
  94. Ramlogan, R., Mina, A., Tampubolon, G., & Metcalfe, J.S. (2007). Networks of Knowledge: the distributed nature of Medical Innovation. Scientometrics 70(2), 459-489.
  95. Reed, P., Conrad, D.A., Hernandez, S.E., Watts. C., & Marcus-Smith, M. (2012). Innovation in patient-centered care: lessons from a qualitative study of innovative health care organizations in Washington State. BMC Family Practice, 13:120. doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-13-120
  96. Roijakkers, N., & Hagedoorn, J. (2006). Inter-firm R&D partnering in pharmaceutical biotechnology since 1975: Trends, patterns, and networks. Research Policy, 35(3), 431-446.
  97. Rose, D. (2003). Collaborative research between users and professionals: Peaks and pitfalls. Psychiatric Bulletin, 27(11), 404- 406.
  98. Rothwell, R. (1992). Successful Industrial Innovation: Critical Factors for the 1990s. R&D Management, 22(3), 221-239.
  99. Rothwell, R. (1994). Towards the fifth-generation innovation process. International Marketing Review, 11 (1), 7-31.
  100. Røtnes, R., & Staalesen, P.D. (2009). New methods for user driven innovation in the health care sector. Nordic Innovation Centre. Oslo, Norway: Econ Pöyry AS. Retrieved from
  101. Sahlsten, M.J., Larsson, I.E., Sjostrom, B., & Plos, K.A. (2008). An analysis of the concept of patient participation. Nursing Forum, 43(1), 2-11. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6198.2008.00090.x.
  102. Shaw, B. (1998). Innovation and new product development in the UK medical equipment industry. International Journal of Technology Management, 15(3-5), 433-445.
  103. Smits, R., & Boon, W. (2008). The role of users in innovation in the pharmaceutical industry. Drug Discovery Today, 13(7-8), 353-359.
  104. Spekowius, G., & Wendler, T. (2006). Advances in Healthcare Technology: Shaping the Future of Medical Care. Philips Research Book Series. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
  105. Stockstrom, C., Lüthje, C., & Antorini, Y.M. (2010). User-generated techniques: The case of the Adult Fans of LEGO, Workshop on The role of users in the intertwined changes of technology and practice. Helsinki Collegium for Advanced Studies, University of Helsinki, Finland.
  106. Swan, J., Bresnen, M., Mendes, M., Newell, S., Perkmann, M., & Robertson, M. (2005). Exploring interactivity in biomedical innovation: a framework and case study analysis. Conference proceeding of 6th European Conference on Organisational Knowledge, Learning and Capabilities. Boston, MA, USA.
  107. Trivedi, P., & Wykes, T. (2002). From passive subjects to equal partners Qualitative review of user involvement in research. British Journal of Psychiatry, 181(6) 468-472. doi: 10.1192/bjp.181.6.468
  108. Urban, G. I., & von Hippel, E. (1988). Lead User Analyses for the Development of New Industrial Products. Management Science, 34(5), 569-582.
  109. Vega-Jurado, J., Gutiérrez-Gracia, A., & Fernández-de-Lucio, I. (2009). Does external knowledge sourcing matter for innovation? Evidence from the Spanish manufacturing industry. Industrial and Corporate Change, 18(4), 637-670.
  110. Vence, X., Sánchez, M.C., Rodil, O. (2013). Targeting biomed cluster from a mature pharma industry: the Medicon Valley experience. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 25(7), 871-889.
  111. von Hippel, E. (1978a). A customer- active paradigm for industrial product idea generation. Research Policy, 7(3), 240-266.
  112. von Hippel, E. (1978b). Successful industrial products from customer ideas: presentation of a new customer-active paradigm with evidence and implications. Journal of Marketing, 42(1), 39-49.
  113. von Hippel, E. (1986). Lead users: source of novel product concepts. Management Science, 32(7), 791-805.
  114. von Hippel, E. (1988). The Sources of innovation. New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  115. von Hippel, E. (2005). Democratizing Innovation, Cambridge, MA: MIT-Press.
  116. von Hippel, E., & de Jong, J.P.J. (2010). Open, distributed and user-centered: Towards a paradigm shift in innovation policy. Scales Research Reports, Number H201009. Zoetermeer: The Netherlands, EIM Business and Policy Research. Retrieved from pdf-ez/H201009.pdf
  117. von Hippel, E., & R. Katz (2002). Shifting Innovation to Users Via Toolkits. Management Science, 48(7), 821-833.
  118. Weigel, S. (2008). The role and importance of a university hospital for the innovation activity in the regional medical device industry: a case study from Switzerland. DRUID-DIME Academy Winter 2008 PhD Conference. Rebild, Denmark.
  119. Wootton I.M., Wood V., & Cook F. (2008). Who wants expert patient programmes for chronic mechanical spinal pain? an investigation into the value of, and recruitment to, an expert patient programme as part of the physiotherapy management of chronic spinal pain. Physiotherapy, 94(1), 78-84.
  120. World Health Organization (2007). People Centred Health Care: A Policy Framework. World Health Organization Western Pacific Region. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO Press.
  121. World Health Organization (2013). Towards People-Centred Health Systems: An Innovative Approach for Better Health Outcomes. World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe, Division of Health Systems and Public Health. Geneva: Switzerland: WHO Press.
  122. Yadav, P. (2010). Differential pricing for pharmaceuticals: Review of current knowledge, new findings and ideas for action. A Study conducted for the UK Department for International Development. London, United Kingdom: UK DFID. Retrieved from documents/s18390en/s18390en.pdf
  123. Zarghom S., Di Fonzo D., & Leung F.H. (2013). Does Socioeconomic Status Affect Patients' Ease of Use of a Touch-Screen (iPad) Patient Survey?. Interactive Journal of Medical Research, 2(1), e1.
Cytowane przez
Udostępnij na Facebooku Udostępnij na Twitterze Udostępnij na Google+ Udostępnij na Pinterest Udostępnij na LinkedIn Wyślij znajomemu