53,229 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
The rationale of e-health evaluation: The case of NHS Direct
An important area of research is that of the evaluation of e-health services. A holistic e-health evaluation framework should address the aspects that are hampering healthcare services from embracing the full potential of information and communication technologies towards successful e-health initiatives. Towards building a holistic evaluation framework for e-health services, this paper is intended to examine the rationale of e-health evaluation, as the paper argues that this aspect should be addressed first in the development of such a framework. NHS Direct which is one of the largest e-health services in the world has been chosen to discuss and validate a set of evaluation rationales and their applicability in practice
Recommended from our members
Information systems and healthcare XXIV: Factors affecting the EAI adoption in the healthcare sector
Recent developments in the field of integration technologies like Enterprise Application Integration (EAI) have emerged to support organizations towards improving the quality of services and reducing integration costs. Despite the importance of EAI, there is limited empirical research reported on its adoption in the healthcare sector. Khoumbati et al. [2006] developed a model for the evaluation of EAI in healthcare organizations. In doing so, the causal interrelationship of EAI adoption factors was identified by using fuzzy cognitive mapping. This paper is a progression of previous work in the area and seeks to contribute by validating the model through a different case environment. Thus, this paper contributes by deriving and proposing the MAESTRO model for EAI adoption. MAESTRO identifies a set of factors that influence EAI adoption and it is evaluated through a real-life case study. It provides an understanding of the EAI adoption process through its grounding on empirical data. In doing so, the MAESTRO model supports the management of healthcare organizations during the decision-making process for EAI adoption
The European Institute for Innovation through Health Data
The European Institute for Innovation through Health Data (i~HD, www.i-hd.eu) has been formed as one of the key sustainable entities arising from the Electronic Health Records for Clinical Research (IMI-JU-115189) and SemanticHealthNet (FP7-288408) projects, in collaboration with several other European projects and initiatives supported by the European Commission. i~HD is a European not-for-profit body, registered in Belgium through Royal Assent. i~HD has been established to tackle areas of challenge in the successful scaling up of innovations that critically rely on high-quality and interoperable health data. It will specifically address obstacles and opportunities to using health data by collating, developing, and promoting best practices in information governance and in semantic interoperability. It will help to sustain and propagate the results of health information and communication technology (ICT) research that enables better use of health data, assessing and optimizing their novel value wherever possible. i~HD has been formed after wide consultation and engagement of many stakeholders to develop methods, solutions, and services that can help to maximize the value obtained by all stakeholders from health data. It will support innovations in health maintenance, health care delivery, and knowledge discovery while ensuring compliance with all legal prerequisites, especially regarding the insurance of patient's privacy protection. It is bringing multiple stakeholder groups together so as to ensure that future solutions serve their collective needs and can be readily adopted affordably and at scale
Recommendations for developing a lifecycle, multidimensional assessment framework for mobile medical apps
Digital health and mobile medical apps (MMAs) have shown great promise in transforming health care, but their adoption in clinical care has been unsatisfactory, and regulatory guidance and coverage decisions have been lacking or incomplete. A multidimensional assessment framework for regulatory, policymaking, health technology assessment, and coverage purposes based on the MMA lifecycle is needed. A targeted review of relevant policy documents from international sources was conducted to map current MMA assessment frameworks, to formulate 10 recommendations, subsequently shared amongst an expert panel of key stakeholders. Recommendations go beyond economic dimensions such as cost and economic evaluation and also include MMA development and update, classification and evidentiary requirements, performance and maintenance monitoring, usability testing, clinical evidence requirements, safety and security, equity considerations, organizational assessment, and additional outcome domains (patient empowerment and environmental impact). The COVIDâ19 pandemic greatly expanded the use of MMAs, but temporary policies governing their use and oversight need consolidation through wellâdeveloped frameworks to support decisionâmakers, producers and introduction into clinical care processes, especially in light of the strong international, crossâborder character of MMAs, the new EU medical device and health technology assessment regulations, and the Next Generation EU funding earmarked for health digitalization
ERP implementation methodologies and frameworks: a literature review
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) implementation is a complex and vibrant process, one that involves a combination of technological and organizational interactions. Often an ERP implementation project is the single largest IT project that an organization has ever launched and requires a mutual fit of system and organization. Also the concept of an ERP implementation supporting business processes across many different departments is not a generic, rigid and uniform concept and depends on variety of factors. As a result, the issues addressing the ERP implementation process have been one of the major concerns in industry. Therefore ERP implementation receives attention from practitioners and scholars and both, business as well as academic literature is abundant and not always very conclusive or coherent. However, research on ERP systems so far has been mainly focused on diffusion, use and impact issues. Less attention has been given to the methods used during the configuration and the implementation of ERP systems, even though they are commonly used in practice, they still remain largely unexplored and undocumented in Information Systems research. So, the academic relevance of this research is the contribution to the existing body of scientific knowledge. An annotated brief literature review is done in order to evaluate the current state of the existing academic literature. The purpose is to present a systematic overview of relevant ERP implementation methodologies and frameworks as a desire for achieving a better taxonomy of ERP implementation methodologies. This paper is useful to researchers who are interested in ERP implementation methodologies and frameworks. Results will serve as an input for a classification of the existing ERP implementation methodologies and frameworks. Also, this paper aims also at the professional ERP community involved in the process of ERP implementation by promoting a better understanding of ERP implementation methodologies and frameworks, its variety and history
Service-Oriented Framework for Developing Interoperable e-Health Systems in a Low-Income Country
e-Health solutions in low-income countries are fragmented, address institution-specific needs, and do little to address the strategic need for inter-institutional exchange of health data. Although various e-health interoperability frameworks exist, contextual factors often hinder their effective adoption in low-income countries. This underlines the need to investigate such factors and to use findings to adapt existing e-health interoperability models. Following a design science approach, this research involved conducting an exploratory survey among 90 medical and Information Technology personnel from 67 health facilities in Uganda. Findings were used to derive requirements for e-health interoperability, and to orchestrate elements of a service oriented framework for developing interoperable e-health systems in a low-income country (SOFIEH). A service-oriented approach yields reusable, flexible, robust, and interoperable services that support communication through well-defined interfaces. SOFIEH was evaluated using structured walkthroughs, and findings indicate that it scored well regarding applicability, usability, and understandability
Recommended from our members
Cross disciplinary evaluation framework for e-health services
This thesis was submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy and awarded by Brunel UniversityE-health is an emerging field in the intersection of information systems, healthcare and business management, referring mainly to healthcare services delivered and enhanced through the use of information and communication technologies (ICT). In a broader sense, the term characterizes not only a technical development, but also a wider way of thinking, an attitude, and a commitment for a network to improve and connect provider, patients and governments. Such a network will be used to educate and inform healthcare professionals, managers and healthcare users; to stimulate innovation in care delivery and health system management; and to improve the healthcare system locally, regionally, and globally. The evaluation of e-health services in both theory and practice has proved to be important and complex. E-health evaluation will help achieve better user services utilization, justify the enormous investments of governments on delivering e-health services, and address the aspects that are hampering healthcare services from embracing the full potential of ICT towards successful e-health initiatives. The complexity of evaluation is mostly due to the challenges faced at the intersection of three areas, each well-known for its complexity; healthcare services, information systems, and evaluation methodologies. However, despite the importance of the evaluation of e-health services, literature shows that e-health evaluation is still in its infancy in terms of development and management. The aim of this research study is to develop, and assess a cross disciplinary evaluation framework for e-health services and to propose evaluation criteria for better userâs utilization and satisfaction of e-health services. The evaluation framework is criteria based, while the criteria are determined by an evaluation matrix of three elements, the evaluation rationales, the evaluation timeframes, and the evaluation stakeholders. The evaluation criteria have to be multi-dimensional as well as grounded in, or derived from, one or more specific perspectives or theories. The framework is designed to deal effectively with the challenges of e-health evaluation and overcome the limitation of existing evaluation frameworks. The cross disciplinary evaluation framework has been examined and validated by adopting an interpretive case study methodology. The chosen case study is NHS direct which is currently one of the largest e-health services in the world. The data collection process has been carried out by using three research methods; archival records, documentation analysis and semi-structured interviews. The use of multiple methods is essential to generate comparable data patterns and structures, and enhance the reliability of conclusions through data triangulation. The contribution of the research study is in bridging the gap between the theory and practice in the evaluation of e-health services by providing an efficient evaluation framework that can be applied to a wide range of e-health application and able to answer real-world concerns. The study also offers three sets of well-argued and balanced hierarchies of evaluation criteria that influence userâs utilization and satisfaction of e-health services. The evaluation criteria can be used to help achieve better user services utilization, to serve as part of e-health evaluation framework, and to address areas that require further attention in the development of future e-health initiatives
Breaking the Barriers to Specialty Care: Practical Ideas to Improve Health Equity and Reduce Cost - Ensuring High-Quality Specialty Care
Tremendous health outcome inequities remain in the U.S. across race and ethnicity, gender and sexual orientation, socio-economic status, and geographyâparticularly for those with serious conditions such as lung or skin cancer, HIV/AIDS, or cardiovascular disease.These inequities are driven by a complex set of factorsâincluding distance to a specialist, insurance coverage, provider bias, and a patient's housing and healthy food access. These inequities not only harm patients, resulting in avoidable illness and death, they also drive unnecessary health systems costs.This 5-part series highlights the urgent need to address these issues, providing resources such as case studies, data, and recommendations to help the health care sector make meaningful strides toward achieving equity in specialty care.Top TakeawaysThere are vast inequalities in access to and outcomes from specialty health care in the U.S. These inequalities are worst for minority patients, low-income patients, patients with limited English language proficiency, and patients in rural areas.A number of solutions have emerged to improve health outcomes for minority and medically underserved patients. These solutions fall into three main categories: increasing specialty care availability, ensuring high-quality care, and helping patients engage in care.As these inequities are also significant drivers of health costs, payers, health care provider organizations, and policy makers have a strong incentive to invest in solutions that will both improve outcomes and reduce unnecessary costs. These actors play a critical role in ensuring that equity is embedded into core care delivery at scale.Part 3: "Ensuring High-Quality Specialty Care"New efforts to mitigate provider implicit bias, establish culturally-competent care, and leverage quality improvement approaches help identify and eliminate disparities in care
Recommended from our members
A systematic review of frameworks for the interrelationships of mental health evidence and policy in low- and middle-income countries
Background: The interrelationships between research evidence and policy-making are complex. Different theoretical frameworks exist to explain general evidenceâpolicy interactions. One largely unexplored element of these interrelationships is how evidence interrelates with, and influences, policy/political agenda-setting. This review aims to identify the elements and processes of theories, frameworks and models on interrelationships of research evidence and health policy-making, with a focus on actionability and agenda-setting in the context of mental health in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).
Methods: A systematic review of theories was conducted based on the BeHeMOTh search method, using a tested and refined search strategy. Nine electronic databases and other relevant sources were searched for peer-reviewed and grey literature. Two reviewers screened the abstracts, reviewed full-text articles, extracted data and performed quality assessments. Analysis was based on a thematic analysis. The included papers had to present an actionable theoretical framework/model on evidence and policy interrelationships, such as knowledge translation or evidence-based policy, specifically target the agenda-setting process, focus on mental health, be from LMICs and published in English.
Results: From 236 publications included in the full text analysis, no studies fully complied with our inclusion criteria. Widening the focus by leaving out âagenda-settingâ, we included ten studies, four of which had unique conceptual frameworks focusing on mental health and LMICs but not agenda-setting. The four analysed frameworks confirmed research gaps from LMICs and mental health, and a lack of focus on agenda-setting. Frameworks and models from other health and policy areas provide interesting conceptual approaches and lessons with regards to agenda-setting.
Conclusion: Our systematic review identified frameworks on evidence and policy interrelations that differ in their elements and processes. No framework fulfilled all inclusion criteria. Four actionable frameworks are applicable to mental health and LMICs, but none specifically target agenda-setting. We have identified agenda-setting as a research theory gap in the context of mental health knowledge translation in LMICs. Frameworks from other health/policy areas could offer lessons on agenda-setting and new approaches for creating policy impact for mental health and to tackle the translational gap in LMICs
- âŠ