ArticleHealth services research2009
Adopting information technology to drive improvements in patient safety: lessons from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality health information technology grantees.
Article in Health services research, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Role of Frontline Leaders in Building Health Professional Support for a New Patient Portal: Survey Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2019Article
- Use of health information technology to advance evidence-based care: lessons from the VA QUERI program.Journal of general internal medicine · 2010Article
- Evaluation of the AHRQ patient safety initiative: framework and approach.Health services research · 2009Article
- Assessment of contributions to patient safety knowledge by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality-funded patient safety projects.Health services research · 2009Article
- Evaluation of the AHRQ patient safety initiative: synthesis of findings.Health services research · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo document and assess the experiences of 104 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)-funded health information technology (health IT) grantees in planning and implementing health IT systems. DATA SOURCE: Grant proposals and interviews with the AHRQ health IT grantees. DATA COLLECTION
methodExtracted descriptive data from the health IT grant proposals; conducted telephone interviews with principal investigators. PRINCIPAL
findingsAHRQ funding of the health IT projects provided important support for health IT development work in various health care settings. Successful implementation required commitment from top management, dedicated staff and financial resources, an open process to encourage buy-in and enthusiasm by end users, and sheer persistence. Technologies required tailoring to the specific organization's needs. Grantees felt their projects could be replicated by others, if organizations had ample IT expertise and resources. Evaluating the value of health IT was hampered by the absence of validated instruments and measures, organizational demands that competed with data collection, and lack of evaluation expertise among health IT implementers.
conclusionsExperiences of the health IT grantees provide rich information for use by health care providers, AHRQ, and other policy makers to help strengthen future health IT development efforts, including the need to improve evaluation design and standards to assess impact.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.