Exploring public perspectives on e-health: findings from two citizen juries

Background Interest and investment in e‐health continue to grow world‐wide, but there remains relatively little engagement with the public on this subject, despite calls for more public involvement in health‐care planning. Design This study used two modified citizen juries to explore barriers and facilitators to e‐health implementation and the priorities for future e‐health research from the perspective of health service users and lay representatives. Citizen juries bring together a group of people to deliberate over a specific issue. They are given information and invited to ‘cross‐examine’ witnesses during the process. Results Jurors were very keen for lay views to be included in e‐health development and embraced the citizen jury approach. They agreed unanimously that e‐health should be developed and thought it was in many ways inevitable. Although there was much enthusiasm for a health‐care system which offered e‐health as an option, there was as much concern about what it might mean for patients if implemented inappropriately. E‐health was preferred as an enhancement rather than substitute for, existing services. Lack of universal access was seen as a potential barrier to implementation but problems such as lack of computer literacy were seen as a temporary issue. Participants emphasized that e‐health research needed to demonstrate both clinical and economic benefits. Conclusion There was broad support from the citizen juries for the development of e‐health, although participants stressed that e‐health should enhance, rather than substitute, face‐to‐face services. One‐day citizen juries proved a practical method of public engagement on this subject.