Conceptual Model for the Integration of Marketing Strategies and Biomedical Innovation in Patient-Centered Care: Mixed Methods Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: The increasing integration of biomedical technology and digital marketing is quickly transforming how patients engage with health care. The patient as an organization (PAO) model is explored in this study. The PAO model encourages patients to be active participants in health care decisions by leveraging wearables, mobile health (mHealth) apps, artificial intelligence (AI) platforms, and health care marketing strategies. Objective: This study aims to examine how the PAO model is evolving in practice and gain insight into both the opportunities and challenges created by the intersection of biomedical innovation and marketing practices in patient care. Methods: The scoping review was conducted across Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and Google Scholar. Selection criteria included articles published from 2014 to 2024. Studies were included if they examined connections among biomedical technologies, marketing strategies, and models of behavior and organizations. Studies lacking interdisciplinary focus or methodological rigor were excluded. Since this work was exploratory, it did not require a strict bias assessment. Additionally, findings derived from qualitative analysis of 18 semistructured interviews with patients, health care professionals, and technologists regarding their experiences with digital technologies and perceptions of trust, autonomy, and engagement were analyzed. Thematic analysis was applied to these interviews using open, axial, and selective coding. Results: From an initial pool of 22,740 records, 45 studies met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. The review revealed that the integration of AI-based personalization, biosensors, and remote monitoring with marketing strategies, such as segmentation, customer relationship management systems, and behavioral nudging, offers potential to enhance patient autonomy and engagement. However, most studies were descriptive or exploratory, with limited empirical evaluation, particularly regarding ethical risks and digital inequality. Qualitative findings further illustrated how patients are adopting organizational behaviors, such as self-monitoring, real-time decision-making, and strategic management of health data. The following 5 key themes emerged: (1) patients as autonomous digital actors, (2) digital health as a behavioral ecosystem, (3) inequities in digital empowerment, (4) negotiating trust and ethical transparency, and (5) blended care as the preferred future. Although many participants embraced digital tools, concerns about data transparency, algorithmic bias, and loss of human connection highlighted important barriers to equitable adoption. Conclusions: The PAO model shows strong potential for personalizing care and engaging patients in health care. However, it is important to note that, so far, conceptual models have dominated the PAO literature, with little empirical evidence to support them. Therefore, as health care practices increasingly integrate digital technologies, it is crucial to develop appropriate safeguards for PAO models.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,126 | 0,097 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,006 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,016 | 0,016 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Communication savante | 0,014 | 0,010 |
| Science ouverte | 0,004 | 0,006 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».