Does the order of the guideline subsections (Functional need, Clarifying questions, Practices, Software approaches, also see) matter, and does the it make sense as is?
Is this supposed to address what is currently available or brainstorm new and alternative approaches? If the latter this would need continual updating as new therapies and treatment options become available)
If this list becomes exhaustive overtime, would it make reading through all available therapies and treatments difficult.
In the Glossary for "Practitioner", suggested to change "medical practitioner" to "healthcare practitioner" to be more inclusive.
"Interaction of systems" section name is vague.
"Technical Literacy" section name. Is this the same as Technological literacy?
"Community" section name is ambiguous.
Is it possible for the Guide to satisfy?
i.e. stating that everyone is unique but defining standards to address all those unique needs?
Contextualization can individualize healthcare experiences
How can individuals share contexts? forms, surveys, tests, etc.?
Understandability is fundamental to quality care
Are individuals overwhelmed by too many questions, surveys and forms?
Place of Care
comfort and security in a particular environment
may not receive adequate internet speeds to accommodate virtual visit
may not have adequate phone connectivity (e.g. rural area)
habits of always doing things in a particular way
seeing doctor in person vs new virtual healthcare method
Can anything be done to address lack of connectivity in the recipient of care's place of care
"Have a way for individuals to discover alternate locations for having virtual healthcare visits. This could be a searchable index of possible locations that match different criteria"
Assumes literacy (digital, etc.) to be able to search for alternative locations.
Assumes they know the area well enough to find suitable alternative locations.
Assumes their health permits the searching and discovery of alternative locations.