The initial collaborator ratio promotes the level of patient information sharing when the community is stable.The higher the proportion of initial collaborators, the higher the level of information sharing of patients when the community is stable, and the greater the benefits of users,as shown in figure 1.When there are no patients to share information at the beginning of the community, the community will not produce any value.Under the same conditions, the larger the proportion of initial collaborators and the network structure parameter ck, the higher the benefit of community patients.
The information sharing level are negatively related with the cost coefficient, namely with the increase of information sharing risk coefficient, information sharing level decrease, but the level of information sharing increases with the increase of network structure parameter ck, as shown in figure 2.It can be seen from figure 2 that when there is no cost for patients to share information, the sharing behavior is relatively stable and at a high level.When ck is 1, 2, 3 respectively, the corresponding information sharing behavior of community patients is 400,800 and 1200.This situation is also true when the risk cost coefficient c is taken as 0.2, 0.4 and 0.6, and with the increase of the risk cost coefficient, the corresponding income level of different network structures is gradually declining. As shown in the figure, when ck is 3 and the cost coefficient is 0.2, the benefit of community patients is 1050.When the cost coefficient increases to 0.4, the benefit of patients decreases to 750.When the cost coefficient continues to increase to 0.6, the benefit of community patients fluctuates around 350.When c is 0.8, the benefit of community patients decrease to 40.This is also true when ck is 1 and 2.When the cost coefficient reaches 1, regardless of the network structure, the benefit of community patients directly drops to 0.
When the risk cost of information sharing is low (0-0.4), the proportion of partners choosing information sharing is high.When the cost factor increases to 60%, the level of information sharing drops significantly,When the degree ck of network nodes is 1, the patient information sharing level is only 20%, while when ck is 3, the patient information sharing level is floating around 75%.When the cost coefficient continues to increase to 0.8, some users in the community share information at the initial time. With the progress of interaction, all patients in the community do not share information soon, as shown in figure 3.At this point, all users exit from information sharing, corresponding to the above situation that the community revenue drops to zero.
on the community information sharing level.That is, with the improvement of patient information conversion coefficient, the number of information sharing users in the community basically remains unchanged.Meanwhile, the network structure ck can promote the information sharing behavior of community patients.Each sub-graph in figure 4 shows that the proportion of partners increases as the degree ck of network nodes increases.
Although patients' information conversion ability has no significant effect on their information sharing level. But compare the differences between the sub-graph in figure 5,it can be found that the income level of community patients increases with the increase of information conversion coefficient. Each sub-graph shows that under the condition of a certain information transformation coefficient (m value from 0.2 to 1), the benefits of community patients increase with the increase of network structure parameter ck.When the information conversion ability of community patients is very low, for example, when the value of m is 0, the network structure has little impact on the benefits of patients. When ck is 1, 2 and 3, the benefits of community patients all fluctuate around 40.With the increase of information conversion coefficient to 0.2, the influence of network structure on its revenue has been preliminarily shown.When compared with ck value 2 and 3, community patients with ck value of 1 had the lowest benefit, but at this time, patients with ck value of 2 and 3 showed little difference in benefits. In the range of patients' information conversion coefficient of 0.4 to 1, patients' benefits increase with the increase of conversion coefficient.
Take ck value of 0.3 as an example. When the patient's information conversion ability coefficient is 0.4, the profit keeps fluctuating around 225.With the patient's information conversion capacity increased to 0.6, the available benefits increased to 350.On the other hand, although network structure has a promoting effect on community patients' earnings, but when ck is not particularly low, the promotion effect of ck on the benefit of community patients is limited. such as when the information conversion coefficient of patients is between 0.6 and 1 and ck is 1, the benefits of patients are all 100.The increase of patients' benefit when ck increased from 1 to 2 was higher than that when ck increased from 2 to 3.
The patient's information absorption ability has no significant impact on the community information sharing level.In the process of information absorption coefficient increasing from zero to 1, the proportion of information sharers under different ck basically remains unchanged, the proportion of partners with node degree 1 is about 40%, and the proportion of information sharers with node degree 2 and 3 is about 70%.That is, network node degree c plays a phased role in promoting the level of community information sharing, as shown in figure 6.
Similar to the information conversion coefficient, although it has no significant influence on the information sharing level of community patients, the information absorption capacity of patients and the network node degree ck have significant promotion effects on their benefits, as shown in figure 7. As can be seen from the figure, with the increase of patients' information absorption capacity, patients' benefits increase.When the information absorption coefficient is 0.2 and the network node degree ck is 3, the community patient benefit is only 150.When the information absorption coefficient increased to 0.8, the benefit of community patients with network node degree ck of 3 reached 500. At the same time, patients' benefits increase with the increase of network structure, and with the increase of information absorption capacity, the increase of network structure ck has more obvious promotion effect on patients' benefits.When the information absorption coefficient is relatively low (n = 0.2), the network node degree increases from 2 to 3, the benefit of information sharers increases from 100 to about 120.When the information absorption coefficient is relatively high (n = 0.8), the network node degree ck increases from 2 to 3, and the information sharer's profit increases from 300 to about 550.It can be seen that, under the dual function of information absorption capacity and network node degree, it is more beneficial to improve the benefits of information sharing.
When the benefit coefficient increased from zero to 0.2, it had little effect on promoting the information sharing behavior of community patients.The proportion of patients in the community who choose to share information is still zero.When patients' benefit coefficient of information sharing was increased to 0.4, the benefit coefficient gradually promoted information sharing behavior.When the profit coefficient increased from 0.4 to 0.6, the proportion of users participating in information sharing increased substantially, from the original unshared information to about 80% of users choosing to share information, as shown in figure 8.
The benefit coefficient of patient information sharing can promote the benefit of community patients.The patient benefit coefficient in this study represents the benefits brought by the user's information sharing behavior, regardless of whether other patients share information or not. At the same time, with the increase of network structure coefficient ck, the overall benefit of community patients gradually increased.Moreover, the larger the benefit coefficient of patient information sharing, the more obvious the promotion effect of network structure on the total benefit of community patients,as shown in figure 9.
The influence of community patients' information reserve on their information sharing behavior is promoted in stages, as shown in figure 10.It can be seen from the figure that when the information reserve level of patients is relatively low (below 0.4), patients who choose information sharing in the community will eventually give up information sharing with the progress of interaction time.With the increase of information reserve level of patients, their sharing behavior gradually improved.However, the promotion effect of community patient user information reserve level on information sharing behavior is staged.When the information storage level of users increased from 0.6 to 1, the number of users who chose to share information barely changed.
The information reserve level of community patients has a limited role in promoting the information sharing behavior, and it increases with the increase of network structure parameter ck. When community patients do not have any information reserves, the community cannot create value for users, as shown in figure 11.Therefore, the community platform manager should provide some information as well as communication space for users in the initial stage.A large amount of information is generated during the interaction between community members, which is usually in a scattered and disordered state. Community managers should collect, sort and store such information and establish a community information warehouse. Once the information demanders have information needs, the community can act as the information provider to conduct initial interaction with the information demanders, so that other patients in the community can have more time and energy to provide more advanced information and patients can obtain more benefits.