International journal of medical informatics
-
This paper (1) presents the protocol of an on-going systematic literature review on the methods of structuring electronic health record (EHR) data and studying the impacts of implemented structures, thus laying basis for the analysis of the empirical articles (2) describes previous reviews published on the subject and retrieved during the search of bibliographic databases, and (3) presents a summary of the results of previous reviews. ⋯ The 12 step review protocol resulted in a variety of reviews of different ways to structure EHR data. None of them compared outcomes of different structuring methods; all had a narrower definition of the Intervention (a specific EHR structure) and Outcome (a specific impact category). Several reviews missed a clear connection between the data structures (interventions) and outcomes, indicating that the methods and applications for structuring patient data have rarely been viewed as independent variables. The review protocol should be defined in a manner that allows replication of the review. There are different ways of structuring patient data with varying impacts, which should be distinguished in further empirical studies, as well as reviews.
-
Recent research showed that physicians in Finland were highly critical of their information technology (IT) systems. They were also critical of the methods of collaboration with the developers of the health IT systems (HITS) in use at the time of the questionnaire. This study turned the set-up around and asked systems developers the same questions about collaboration. What is developers' view on end user participation in HITS development at the moment? How would developers wish end users to participate in systems development? Do the developers' views differ from the physicians' (end users') views of the current state of collaboration in developing IT systems? ⋯ Both physicians and developers seem to be "willing but not able" to collaborate with each other. Possible reasons for the differences in views include the fact that there is no return channel of communication on what happened to the end users' feedback, and that developers collaborate with customer representatives who are not end users. It is obvious that there are one or more spots along the route between the "end developers" and end users where there is a breakdown of the information flow.