Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24623194›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2014

Reliability and validity of the American Hospital Association's national longitudinal survey of health information technology adoption.

Jordan Everson, Shoou-Yih D Lee, Charles P Friedman

Open access · bronzeAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Hospital adoption of multiple health information exchange approaches and information accessibility.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2020
    Article
  13. Hospital adoption of API-enabled patient data access.Healthcare (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2019
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Assessing the impact of health system organizational structure on hospital electronic data sharing.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2018
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Electronic health record adoption in US hospitals: the emergence of a digital "advanced use" divide.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2017
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jordan EversonUniversity of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Shoou-Yih D LeeUniversity of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Charles P FriedmanUniversity of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA University of Michigan School of Information, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
University of Michigan–Ann Arbor · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the internal consistency, construct validity, and criterion validity of a battery of items measuring information technology (IT) adoption, included in the American Hospital Association (AHA) IT Supplement Survey.

methodsWe analyzed the 2012 release of the AHA IT Supplement Survey. We performed reliability analysis using Cronbach's α and part-whole correlations, construct validity analysis using principal component analysis (PCA), and criterion validity analysis by assessing the items' sensitivity and specificity of predicting attestation to Medicare Meaningful Use (MU).

resultsTwenty-eight items of the 31-item instrument and five of six functionality subcategories defined by the AHA all produced reliable scales (α's between 0.833 and 0.958). PCA mostly confirmed the AHA's categorization of functionalities; however, some items loaded only weakly onto the factor most associated with their survey category, and one category loaded onto two separate factors. The battery of items was a valid predictor of attestation to MU, producing a sensitivity of 0.82 and a specificity of 0.72. DISCUSSION: The battery of items performed well on most indices of reliability and validity. However, they lack some components of ideal survey design, leaving open the possibility that respondents are not responding independently to each item in the survey. Despite measuring only a portion of the objectives required for attestation to MU, the items are a moderately sensitive and specific predictor of attestation.

conclusionsThe analyzed instrument exhibits satisfactory reliability and validity.

Indexed as

Data CollectionMedical InformaticsAmerican Hospital AssociationDiffusion of InnovationLongitudinal StudiesReproducibility of ResultsUnited StatesElectronic Health RecordsHospitalsMeaningful UseMedical InformaticsReliability and Validity

Identifiers

PMID24623194
PMCPMC4173179
OpenAlexW2155407584

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.