Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27199195›Full record

ArticleYearbook of medical informatics2016

The Renewed Promise of Medical Informatics.

J H van Bemmel, A T McCray

Abstract readHistorical Article
In one paragraph

Article in Yearbook of medical informatics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Reflections Towards the Future of Medical Informatics.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2023
    Article
  2. Article
  3. On the 80th Birthday of Jan van Bemmel.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2019
    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

2 authors.

J H van BemmelJan H. van Bemmel, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, E-mail: JanHvB@gmail.com.
A T McCrayAlexa T. McCray, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA, E-mail: Alexa_McCray@hms.harvard.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The promise of the field of Medical Informatics has been great and its impact has been significant. In 1999, the Yearbook editors of the International Medical Informatics Association (IMIA) - also the authors of the present paper - sought to assess this impact by selecting a number of seminal papers in the field, and asking experts to comment on these articles. In particular, it was requested whether and how the expectations, represented by these papers, had been fulfilled since their publication several decades earlier. Each expert was also invited to comment on what might be expected in the future. In the present paper, these areas are briefly reviewed again. Where did these early papers have an impact and where were they not as successful as originally expected? It should be noted that the extraordinary developments in computer technology observed in the last two decades could not have been foreseen by these early researchers. In closing, some of the possibilities and limitations of research in medical informatics are outlined in the context of a framework that considers six levels of computer applications in medicine and health care. For each level, some predictions are made for the future, concluded with thoughts on fruitful areas for ongoing research in the field.

Indexed as

BibliometricsComputersDecision Support Systems, ClinicalElectronic Health RecordsForecastingHistory, 20th CenturyHistory, 21st CenturyMedical InformaticsPeriodicals as TopicSocieties, Medicalclinical decision supportcomputing methodologieselectronic health recordsforecastinghistoryinformation systemsMedical Informatics

Identifiers

PMID27199195
PMCPMC5171503

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.