Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29133283›Full record

ReviewJMIR medical informatics2017

Open-Source Electronic Health Record Systems for Low-Resource Settings: Systematic Review.

Assel Syzdykova, André Malta, Maria Zolfo, Ermias Diro, José Luis Oliveira

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JMIR medical informatics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04564209 (Information Visualizations to Facilitate Clinician-patient Communication in HIV Care), which is not on this map. Cited by 40 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 4 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.

NCT04564209 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Information Visualizations to Facilitate Clinician-patient Communication in HIV Care (Info Viz: HIV)

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Colorado, DenverRan2021 to 2023Enrolled164ConditionsHIV, Communication ResearchArmsInfo Viz for Health
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

40 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Which Electronic Health Record System Should We Use? A Systematic Review.Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre · 2022
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Building the future of ICU care: Is our digital foundation strong enough? A multicentre survey of Australian and New Zealand intensive care units.Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  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

5 authors.

Assel Syzdykova *University of Aveiro, Department of Electronics, Telecommunications and Informatics (DETI) / Institute of Electronics and Informatics Engineering of Aveiro (IEETA), Aveiro, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0901-3724
André Malta *University of Aveiro, Department of Electronics, Telecommunications and Informatics (DETI) / Institute of Electronics and Informatics Engineering of Aveiro (IEETA), Aveiro, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7997-7521
Maria ZolfoInstitute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9756-9380
Ermias DiroUniversity of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3595-6323
José Luis OliveiraUniversity of Aveiro, Department of Electronics, Telecommunications and Informatics (DETI) / Institute of Electronics and Informatics Engineering of Aveiro (IEETA), Aveiro, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6672-6176

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite the great impact of information and communication technologies on clinical practice and on the quality of health services, this trend has been almost exclusive to developed countries, whereas countries with poor resources suffer from many economic and social issues that have hindered the real benefits of electronic health (eHealth) tools. As a component of eHealth systems, electronic health records (EHRs) play a fundamental role in patient management and effective medical care services. Thus, the adoption of EHRs in regions with a lack of infrastructure, untrained staff, and ill-equipped health care providers is an important task. However, the main barrier to adopting EHR software in low- and middle-income countries is the cost of its purchase and maintenance, which highlights the open-source approach as a good solution for these underserved areas.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review of open-source EHR systems based on the requirements and limitations of low-resource settings.

methodsFirst, we reviewed existing literature on the comparison of available open-source solutions. In close collaboration with the University of Gondar Hospital, Ethiopia, we identified common limitations in poor resource environments and also the main requirements that EHRs should support. Then, we extensively evaluated the current open-source EHR solutions, discussing their strengths and weaknesses, and their appropriateness to fulfill a predefined set of features relevant for low-resource settings.

resultsThe evaluation methodology allowed assessment of several key aspects of available solutions that are as follows: (1) integrated applications, (2) configurable reports, (3) custom reports, (4) custom forms, (5) interoperability, (6) coding systems, (7) authentication methods, (8) patient portal, (9) access control model, (10) cryptographic features, (11) flexible data model, (12) offline support, (13) native client, (14) Web client,(15) other clients, (16) code-based language, (17) development activity, (18) modularity, (19) user interface, (20) community support, and (21) customization. The quality of each feature is discussed for each of the evaluated solutions and a final comparison is presented.

conclusionsThere is a clear demand for open-source, reliable, and flexible EHR systems in low-resource settings. In this study, we have evaluated and compared five open-source EHR systems following a multidimensional methodology that can provide informed recommendations to other implementers, developers, and health care professionals. We hope that the results of this comparison can guide decision making when needing to adopt, install, and maintain an open-source EHR solution in low-resource settings.

Indexed as

eHealthEHRelectronic health recordopen sourcesoftware

Identifiers

PMID29133283
PMCPMC5703976

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.