SynthesisPloS one2019
Factors influencing harmonized health data collection, sharing and linkage in Denmark and Switzerland: A systematic review.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Variation in approaches to antimicrobial use surveillance in high-income secondary care settings: a systematic review.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2021Pooled it
- Toward Fit-for-Purpose Data for Drug Assessment in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer: A Core Dataset.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2026Article
- Top three priorities for artificial intelligence integration into emergency, critical, and perioperative medicine: an interdisciplinary clinical expert consensus.Journal of anesthesia, analgesia and critical care · 2025Review
- Article
- Socio-Technical Analysis of the Benefits and Barriers to Using a Digital Representation of the Global Horse Population in Equine Veterinary Medicine.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- Road traffic death coding quality in the WHO Mortality Database.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2023Article
- Case Study: Using a Shared International Database to Document Veterinary Consumption of Antibiotics in Pakistan.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- The Swiss health care atlas-relaunch in scale.Research in health services & regions · 2023Article
- Insights into measuring health disparities using electronic health records from a statewide network of health systems: A case study.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2023Article
- Social determinants of health data in solid organ transplantation: National data sources and future directions.American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons · 2022Review
- Individual notions of fair data sharing from the perspectives of Swiss stakeholders.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Evolution or Revolution? Recommendations to Improve the Swiss Health Data Framework.Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
- Systemic Fairness for Sharing Health Data: Perspectives From Swiss Stakeholders.Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
- Sensing the (digital) pulse. Future steps for improving the secondary use of data for research in Switzerland.Digital healthArticle
- Multimodal data-driven approaches in retinal vein occlusion: A narrative review integrating machine learning and bioinformatics.Advances in ophthalmology practice and researchReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe digitalization of medicine has led to a considerable growth of heterogeneous health datasets, which could improve healthcare research if integrated into the clinical life cycle. This process requires, amongst other things, the harmonization of these datasets, which is a prerequisite to improve their quality, re-usability and interoperability. However, there is a wide range of factors that either hinder or favor the harmonized collection, sharing and linkage of health data.
objectiveThis systematic review aims to identify barriers and facilitators to health data harmonization-including data sharing and linkage-by a comparative analysis of studies from Denmark and Switzerland.
methodsPublications from PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE and CINAHL involving cross-institutional or cross-border collection, sharing or linkage of health data from Denmark or Switzerland were searched to identify the reported barriers and facilitators to data harmonization.
resultsOf the 345 projects included, 240 were single-country and 105 were multinational studies. Regarding national projects, a Swiss study reported on average more barriers and facilitators than a Danish study. Barriers and facilitators of a technical nature were most frequently reported.
conclusionThis systematic review gathered evidence from Denmark and Switzerland on barriers and facilitators concerning data harmonization, sharing and linkage. Barriers and facilitators were strictly interrelated with the national context where projects were carried out. Structural changes, such as legislation implemented at the national level, were mirrored in the projects. This underlines the impact of national strategies in the field of health data. Our findings also suggest that more openness and clarity in the reporting of both barriers and facilitators to data harmonization constitute a key element to promote the successful management of new projects using health data and the implementation of proper policies in this field. Our study findings are thus meaningful beyond these two countries.
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.