make this paper AL-free, please.

**Annotated Bibliography** Pagliari, C., Sloan, D., Gregor, P., Sullivan, F., Detmer, D., Kahan, J. P., Oortwijn, W., & MacGillivray, S. (2005). What is eHealth (4): A scoping exercise to map the field. *Journal of Medical Internet Research*, *7*(1), e9. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.7.1.e9

**Summary:** Pagliari et al. (2005) examine the concept of eHealth through a scoping exercise, aiming to define its scope and applications while mapping the evolving field. eHealth, a broad term, refers to the use of emerging information and communication technologies (ICT), primarily the internet, to improve healthcare services and delivery. The paper highlights the growing importance of eHealth in both policy and practice, especially in light of the UK's National Programme for Information Technology (NPfIT). By exploring various databases and literature, the authors identify a lack of consensus on the definition of eHealth but highlight common themes, such as its use in telemedicine, electronic health records (EHRs), and patient communication.

The study offers a thematic analysis of existing definitions, noting the varied focus across different stakeholders, including patients, healthcare providers, and administrators. Many definitions emphasize the role of ICT in enabling communication and data management in healthcare settings. The authors also explore how eHealth bridges gaps in care, particularly in underserved areas, through telemedicine and other digital interventions. They argue that while eHealth has transformative potential, its scope and applications need further refinement and study to address the complexities of healthcare delivery in the digital age.

**Critical Evaluation:** The paper provides a valuable foundation for understanding the diverse and evolving landscape of eHealth. By using a scoping exercise, Pagliari et al. offer a systematic approach to mapping the field, capturing its interdisciplinary nature. One of the paper's strengths lies in its broad perspective, considering eHealth's implications for patients, healthcare systems, and technology providers. This approach ensures a comprehensive view of how eHealth can revolutionize healthcare by improving access, efficiency, and patient outcomes.

However, the paper's reliance on literature published between 1997 and 2003 means that some aspects of eHealth discussed, such as telemedicine and EHRs, have since evolved significantly. The authors acknowledge this limitation, noting that rapid advancements in technology could render some of their findings outdated. Indeed, modern eHealth includes more advanced technologies like artificial intelligence (AI), big data analytics, and wearable health devices, which were not extensively covered in the paper. Despite this, the paper remains highly relevant as it provides an essential framework for understanding the foundational elements of eHealth and its challenges.

Another strength of the study is its focus on the ethical, organizational, and infrastructural challenges of eHealth. The paper discusses critical issues such as patient data security and privacy, which are even more pertinent today with the proliferation of digital health platforms. The authors also highlight the importance of interoperability in healthcare systems, stressing the need for standardized data exchange formats and systems to ensure that eHealth solutions can be widely adopted and effectively implemented.

Yet, while the paper successfully maps the broad landscape of eHealth, it offers limited insight into specific future applications of eHealth technologies. The analysis stops short of predicting the direction in which the field might evolve. For instance, while telemedicine and EHRs are discussed, there is little exploration of emerging technologies such as mobile health apps, AI-driven diagnostics, and personalized medicine, which are now integral to the eHealth domain. These omissions reflect the state of the field at the time of the paper's publication, but they underscore the need for continuous research to keep pace with technological developments.

**Relevance:** This paper is particularly relevant for healthcare professionals, policymakers, and researchers exploring the integration of technology into healthcare. It serves as an essential resource for understanding the early conceptualizations of eHealth and provides a framework for analyzing the field's progression. The paper's interdisciplinary approach is useful for shaping discussions on the future of eHealth, particularly in how it can address healthcare disparities, improve patient outcomes, and enhance the efficiency of healthcare delivery systems.

Moreover, the paper's discussion of ethical issues surrounding data privacy and the need for patient-centered approaches remains highly applicable today. As digital health platforms continue to grow, ensuring the protection of patient data is more critical than ever, making this paper an important reference for discussions on the ethical and legal implications of eHealth.

**Conclusion:** Pagliari et al.'s (2005) work is a foundational contribution to the study of eHealth. It maps the emerging field and explores key themes, such as telemedicine, EHRs, and the role of ICT in healthcare communication. While the paper has limitations, especially given the rapid technological advancements since its publication, it remains a critical reference point for understanding eHealth's potential and challenges. Its interdisciplinary perspective and focus on ethical, organizational, and technical issues provide valuable insights for both researchers and practitioners in the field of digital health.