Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28946908›Full record

SynthesisBMC medical informatics and decision making2017

Factors influencing the development of primary care data collection projects from electronic health records: a systematic review of the literature.

Marie-Line Gentil, Marc Cuggia, Laure Fiquet, Camille Hagenbourger, Thomas Le Berre, Agnès Banâtre, Eric Renault, Guillaume Bouzille, Anthony Chapron

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Routine Health Information Systems in the European Context: A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Data resource profile: the Intego-II primary care database.International journal of epidemiology · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. 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

9 authors.

Marie-Line GentilDepartment of General Practice, University of Rennes 1, F-35000, Rennes, France. marieline.gentil@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9832-7199
Marc CuggiaINSERM, U1099, F-35000, Rennes, France.
Laure FiquetDepartment of General Practice, University of Rennes 1, F-35000, Rennes, France.
Camille HagenbourgerDepartment of General Practice, University of Rennes 1, F-35000, Rennes, France.
Thomas Le BerreDepartment of General Practice, University of Rennes 1, F-35000, Rennes, France.
Agnès BanâtreDepartment of General Practice, University of Rennes 1, F-35000, Rennes, France.
Eric RenaultUniversity of Rennes 1, LTSI (Laboratory for signal and image processing), F-35000, Rennes, France.
Guillaume BouzilleINSERM, U1099, F-35000, Rennes, France.
Anthony ChapronDepartment of General Practice, University of Rennes 1, F-35000, Rennes, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrimary care data gathered from Electronic Health Records are of the utmost interest considering the essential role of general practitioners (GPs) as coordinators of patient care. These data represent the synthesis of the patient history and also give a comprehensive picture of the population health status. Nevertheless, discrepancies between countries exist concerning routine data collection projects. Therefore, we wanted to identify elements that influence the development and durability of such projects.

methodsA systematic review was conducted using the PubMed database to identify worldwide current primary care data collection projects. The gray literature was also searched via official project websites and their contact person was emailed to obtain information on the project managers. Data were retrieved from the included studies using a standardized form, screening four aspects: projects features, technological infrastructure, GPs' roles, data collection network organization.

resultsThe literature search allowed identifying 36 routine data collection networks, mostly in English-speaking countries: CPRD and THIN in the United Kingdom, the Veterans Health Administration project in the United States, EMRALD and CPCSSN in Canada. These projects had in common the use of technical facilities that range from extraction tools to comprehensive computing platforms. Moreover, GPs initiated the extraction process and benefited from incentives for their participation. Finally, analysis of the literature data highlighted that governmental services, academic institutions, including departments of general practice, and software companies, are pivotal for the promotion and durability of primary care data collection projects.

conclusionSolid technical facilities and strong academic and governmental support are required for promoting and supporting long-term and wide-range primary care data collection projects.

Indexed as

Data CollectionElectronic Health RecordsPrimary Health CareHumansData collectionData miningElectronic health recordsGovernancePrimary careSecondary useStakeholders

Identifiers

PMID28946908
PMCPMC5613384

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.