ArticleApplied clinical informatics2018
A Brief Survey on Six Basic and Reduced eHealth Indicators in Seven Countries in 2017.
Article in Applied clinical informatics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Optimizing radiological diagnostic management via mobile devices in trauma surgery].Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024Article
- E-mental health in Germany - what is the current use and what are experiences of different types of health care providers for patients with mental illnesses?Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2023Article
- Market access and value-based pricing of digital health applications in Germany.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2022Review
- E-Health Practices and Technologies: A Systematic Review from 2014 to 2019.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- The PICASO cloud platform for improved holistic care in rheumatoid arthritis treatment-experiences of patients and clinicians.Arthritis research & therapy · 2021Observational
- The Effect of Innovation Capabilities of Health Care Organizations on the Quality of Health Information Technology: Model Development With Cross-sectional Data.JMIR medical informatics · 2021Article
- E-Health System Characteristics, Medical Performance, and Healthcare Quality at Jordan's Health Centers.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2021Article
- Clinical Information Systems - Seen through the Ethics Lens.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2020Review
- National monitoring and evaluation of eHealth: a scoping review.JAMIA open · 2020Article
- Celebrating Clinical Informatics as a Specialty Practice.Applied clinical informatics · 2020Article
- Health Information Systems - from Present to Future?Methods of information in medicine · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHolistic, ubiquitous support of patient-centered health care (eHealth) at all health care institutions and in patients' homes through information processing is increasingly supplementing institution-centered care. While eHealth indicators may measure the transition from institution-centered (e.g., hospital-centered) information processing to patient-centered information processing, collecting relevant and timely data for such indicators has been difficult.
objectivesThis article aims to design some basic eHealth indicators, which are easily collected and measure how well information processing supports holistic patient-centered health care, and to evaluate penetrance of patient-centered health as measured by the indicators internationally via an expert survey.
methodsWe identified six basic indicators that measure access of health care professionals, patients, and caregivers to the patient's health record data and the ability of providers, patients, and caregivers to add information in the patient's record. In a survey of international informatics experts, these indicators' penetrance were evaluated for Austria, Finland, Germany, Hong Kong, South Korea, Sweden, and the United States in the summer of 2017.
resultsThe eHealth status measured by the indicators varied significantly between these seven countries. In Finland, most practices measured by the indicators were fully implemented whereas in Germany only one practice was partially realized.
conclusionProgress in the implementation of practices that support patient-centered care could mainly be observed in those countries where the "political will" focused on achieving patient-centered care as opposed to an emphasis on institution-centered care. The six eHealth indicators seem to be useful for measuring national progress in patient-centered care. Future work will extend the number of countries analyzed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.