@inproceedings{EhlersNitscheBusseetal.2021,
  author    = {Ehlers, Jan Peter and Nitsche, Julia and Busse, Theresa Sophie and Kernebeck, Sven and Smetana, Jan and Taetz-Harrer, Angelika and Eulitz, Mona and Zupanic, Michaela},
  title     = {Digitale Lehre - Reine Informationsvermittlung oder auch Lebensraum Universit{\"a}t und Gemeinschaftsbildung?},
  series = {digiGEBF, 18.06.2021, digital},
  booktitle = {digiGEBF, 18.06.2021, digital},
  year      = {2021},
  language  = {de}
}
@article{NitscheSmetanaTaetzHarreretal.2021,
  author    = {Nitsche, Julia and Smetana, Jan and Taetz-Harrer, Angelika and Zupanic, Michaela and Eulitz, Mona and Ehlers, Jan Peter},
  title     = {Needs Must when the Devil Drives - Migration of an Entire University to Digital Teaching Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic. International Conference: The Future of Edcuation.},
  series = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Hochschulentwicklung},
  volume    = {16},
  journal   = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Hochschulentwicklung},
  issn      = {2219-6994},
  year      = {2021},
  language  = {de}
}
@inproceedings{BusseJuxKernebecketal.2021,
  author    = {Busse, Theresa Sophie and Jux, Chantal and Kernebeck, Sven and Meyer, Dorothee and Dreier, Larissa and Zenz, Daniel and Wager, Julia and Zernikow, Boris and Ehlers, Jan Peter},
  title     = {"Manchmal gehen die Faxger{\"a}te gerade nicht so wie sie sollen. Dann kommt irgendwie nichts an und dann ruft man das f{\"u}nfte Mal an." - Nutzung von Design Thinking zur partizipativen Entwicklung einer elektronischen Fallakte in der p{\"a}diatrischen Palliativversorgung},
  series = {20. Deutscher Kongress f{\"u}r Versorgungsforschung, 06. - 08.10.2021, digital},
  booktitle = {20. Deutscher Kongress f{\"u}r Versorgungsforschung, 06. - 08.10.2021, digital},
  doi       = {10.3205/21dkvf220},
  year      = {2021},
  language  = {de}
}
@inproceedings{JuxBusseKernebecketal.2021,
  author    = {Jux, Chantal and Busse, Theresa Sophie and Kernebeck, Sven and Dreier, L.A. and Meyer, Dorothee and Zenz, Daniel and Wager, Julia and Zernikow, Boris and Ehlers, Jan Peter},
  title     = {Nutzung von User-Stories zur partizipativen Entwicklung einer elektronischen Patient*innenakte (EPA) f{\"u}r die spezialisierte ambulante p{\"a}diatrische Palliativversorgung (SAPPV) - ein Erfahrungsbericht aus Perspektive der Versorgungsforschung},
  series = {20. Deutscher Kongress f{\"u}r Versorgungsforschung, 08.10.2021, digital},
  booktitle = {20. Deutscher Kongress f{\"u}r Versorgungsforschung, 08.10.2021, digital},
  doi       = {10.3205/21dkvf254},
  year      = {2021},
  language  = {de}
}
@article{BusseKernebeckNefetal.2021,
  author    = {Busse, Theresa Sophie and Kernebeck, Sven and Nef, Larissa and Rebacz, Patrick and Kickbusch, Ilona and Ehlers, Jan Peter},
  title     = {Views on Using Social Robots in Professional Caregiving: Content Analysis of a Scenario Method Workshop (Preprint)},
  series = {J Med Internet Res},
  volume    = {23},
  journal   = {J Med Internet Res},
  number    = {11},
  doi       = {10.25974/fhms-17307},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:hbz:836-opus-173072},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {BACKGROUND Interest in digital technologies in the health care sector is growing and can be a way to reduce the burden on professional caregivers while helping people to become more independent. Social robots are regarded as a special form of technology that can be usefully applied in professional caregiving with the potential to focus on interpersonal contact. While implementation is progressing slowly, a debate on the concepts and applications of social robots in future care is necessary. OBJECTIVE In addition to existing studies with a focus on societal attitudes toward social robots, there is a need to understand the views of professional caregivers and patients. This study used desired future scenarios to collate the perspectives of experts and analyze the significance for developing the place of social robots in care. METHODS In February 2020, an expert workshop was held with 88 participants (health professionals and educators; [PhD] students of medicine, health care, professional care, and technology; patient advocates; software developers; government representatives; and research fellows) from Austria, Germany, and Switzerland. Using the scenario methodology, the possibilities of analog professional care (Analog Care), fully robotic professional care (Robotic Care), teams of robots and professional caregivers (Deep Care), and professional caregivers supported by robots (Smart Care) were discussed. The scenarios were used as a stimulus for the development of ideas about future professional caregiving. The discussion was evaluated using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS The majority of the experts were in favor of care in which people are supported by technology (Deep Care) and developed similar scenarios with a focus on dignity-centeredness. The discussions then focused on the steps necessary for its implementation, highlighting a strong need for the development of eHealth competence in society, a change in the training of professional caregivers, and cross-sectoral concepts. The experts also saw user acceptance as crucial to the use of robotics. This involves the acceptance of both professional caregivers and care recipients. CONCLUSIONS The literature review and subsequent workshop revealed how decision-making about the value of social robots depends on personal characteristics related to experience and values. There is therefore a strong need to recognize individual perspectives of care before social robots become an integrated part of care in the future.},
  language  = {de}
}