Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25302031›Full record

ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2014

Implementing a regional oncology information system: approach and lessons learned.

W K Evans, F D Ashbury, G L Hogue, A Smith, J Pun

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Advancing Cardio-Oncology in Asia.Korean circulation journal · 2023
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. A Conceptual Model of an Oncology Information System.Cancer management and research · 2020
    Article
  8. Oncology Information System: A Qualitative Study of Users' Requirements.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2019
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Interdisciplinary eHealth Practice in Cancer Care: A Review of the Literature.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2017
    Review
  11. 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

5 authors.

W K EvansDepartment of Oncology, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON.
F D AshburyDalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON. ; Division of Preventive Oncology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB. ; Illawarra Health and Medical Research Institute, University of Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia. ; Intelligent Improvement Consultants, Toronto, ON.
G L HogueInsightful Solutions, Englewood, CO, U.S.A.
A SmithADS Consulting Solutions, Ancaster, ON.
J PunIntelligent Improvement Consultants, Toronto, ON.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

rationalePaper-based medical record systems are known to have major problems of inaccuracy, incomplete data, poor accessibility, and challenges to patient confidentiality. They are also an inefficient mechanism of record-sharing for interdisciplinary patient assessment and management, and represent a major problem for keeping current and monitoring quality control to facilitate improvement. To address those concerns, national, regional, and local health care authorities have increased the pressure on oncology practices to upgrade from paper-based systems to electronic health records.

objectivesHere, we describe and discuss the challenges to implementing a region-wide oncology information system across four independent health care organizations, and we describe the lessons learned from the initial phases that are now being applied in subsequent activities of this complex project.

resultsThe need for change must be shared across centres to increase buy-in, adoption, and implementation. It is essential to establish physician leadership, commitment, and engagement in the process. Work processes had to be revised to optimize use of the new system. Culture change must be included in the change management strategy. Furthermore, training and resource requirements must be thoroughly planned, implemented, monitored, and modified as required for effective adoption of new work processes and technology. Interfaces must be established with multiple existing electronic systems across the region to ensure appropriate patient flow. Periodic assessment of the existing project structure is necessary, and adjustments are often required to ensure that the project meets its objectives.

conclusionsThe implementation of region-wide oncology information systems across different health practice locations has many challenges. Leadership is essential. A strong, collaborative information-sharing strategy across the region and with the supplier is essential to identify, discuss, and resolve implementation problems. A structure that supports project management and accountability contributes to success.

Indexed as

Electronic medical recordsimplementationoncology information systems

Identifiers

PMID25302031
PMCPMC4189563

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.