Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27018264›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2017

A proposed national research and development agenda for population health informatics: summary recommendations from a national expert workshop.

Hadi Kharrazi, Elyse C Lasser, William A Yasnoff, John Loonsk, Aneel Advani, Harold P Lehmann, David C Chin, Jonathan P Weiner

Abstract readConference Proceedings
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed
–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

36 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Of Screening, Stratification, and Scores.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021
    Review
  11. The National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C): Rationale, design, infrastructure, and deployment.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Detecting Systemic Data Quality Issues in Electronic Health Records.Studies in health technology and informatics · 2019
    Article
  19. 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

8 authors.

Hadi KharraziJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Center for Population Health Information Technology, Baltimore, MD, USA, kharrazi@jhu.edu.
Elyse C LasserJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Center for Population Health Information Technology, Baltimore, MD, USA.
William A YasnoffJohns Hopkins School of Medicine, Division of Health Sciences Informatics, Baltimore, MD, USA.
John LoonskJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Center for Population Health Information Technology, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Aneel AdvaniJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Center for Population Health Information Technology, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Harold P LehmannJohns Hopkins School of Medicine, Division of Health Sciences Informatics, Baltimore, MD, USA.
David C ChinJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Center for Population Health Information Technology, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Jonathan P WeinerJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Center for Population Health Information Technology, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Funding

Symposium on Population Health InformaticsR13LM011955 · NLM · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI WEINER, JONATHAN P · 2014 to 2014
$13k
NLM NIH HHS R13 LM011955
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe Johns Hopkins Center for Population Health IT hosted a 1-day symposium sponsored by the National Library of Medicine to help develop a national research and development (R&D) agenda for the emerging field of population health informatics (PopHI). MATERIAL AND

methodsThe symposium provided a venue for national experts to brainstorm, identify, discuss, and prioritize the top challenges and opportunities in the PopHI field, as well as R&D areas to address these.

resultsThis manuscript summarizes the findings of the PopHI symposium. The symposium participants' recommendations have been categorized into 13 overarching themes, including policy alignment, data governance, sustainability and incentives, and standards/interoperability. DISCUSSION: The proposed consensus-based national agenda for PopHI consisted of 18 priority recommendations grouped into 4 broad goals: (1) Developing a standardized collaborative framework and infrastructure, (2) Advancing technical tools and methods, (3) Developing a scientific evidence and knowledge base, and (4) Developing an appropriate framework for policy, privacy, and sustainability. There was a substantial amount of agreement between all the participants on the challenges and opportunities for PopHI as well as on the actions that needed to be taken to address these.

conclusionPopHI is a rapidly growing field that has emerged to address the population dimension of the Triple Aim. The proposed PopHI R&D agenda is comprehensive and timely, but should be considered only a starting-point, given that ongoing developments in health policy, population health management, and informatics are very dynamic, suggesting that the agenda will require constant monitoring and updating.

Indexed as

Health Services ResearchMedical InformaticsPopulation HealthHealth PolicyHumansUnited Statesinformatics agendapopulation health informaticspublic health informatics

Identifiers

PMID27018264
PMCPMC5201177

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.