Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32808938›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2020

Technological Capabilities to Assess Digital Excellence in Hospitals in High Performing Health Care Systems: International eDelphi Exercise.

Marta Krasuska, Robin Williams, Aziz Sheikh, Bryony Dean Franklin, Catherine Heeney, Wendy Lane, Hajar Mozaffar, Kathy Mason, Sally Eason, Susan Hinder and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Digital Transformation in Healthcare: Technology Acceptance and Its Applications.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

13 authors.

Marta KrasuskaUsher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-1481-3507
Robin WilliamsInstitute for the Study of Science, Technology and Innovation, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-9044-4611
Aziz SheikhUsher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-7022-3056
Bryony Dean FranklinUCL School of Pharmacy, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-2892-1245
Catherine HeeneyInstitute for the Study of Science, Technology and Innovation, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0725-974X
Wendy LaneNational Health Services Arden and Greater East Midlands Commissioning Support Unit, Warwick, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-3538-4820
Hajar MozaffarBusiness School, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-6400-5260
Kathy MasonNational Health Services Arden and Greater East Midlands Commissioning Support Unit, Warwick, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-7754-6966
Sally EasonNational Health Services Arden and Greater East Midlands Commissioning Support Unit, Warwick, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-4891-4103
Susan HinderInstitute for the Study of Science, Technology and Innovation, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-8451-2027
Rachel DunscombeImperial College, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-2266-7063
Henry W W PottsInstitute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-6200-8804
Kathrin CresswellUsher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-6634-9537

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHospitals worldwide are developing ambitious digital transformation programs as part of broader efforts to create digitally advanced health care systems. However, there is as yet no consensus on how best to characterize and assess digital excellence in hospitals.

objectiveOur aim was to develop an international agreement on a defined set of technological capabilities to assess digital excellence in hospitals.

methodsWe conducted a two-stage international modified electronic Delphi (eDelphi) consensus-building exercise, which included a qualitative analysis of free-text responses. In total, 31 international health informatics experts participated, representing clinical, academic, public, and vendor organizations.

resultsWe identified 35 technological capabilities that indicate digital excellence in hospitals. These are divided into two categories: (a) capabilities within a hospital (n=20) and (b) capabilities enabling communication with other parts of the health and social care system, and with patients and carers (n=15). The analysis of free-text responses pointed to the importance of nontechnological aspects of digitally enabled change, including social and organizational factors. Examples included an institutional culture characterized by a willingness to transform established ways of working and openness to risk-taking. The availability of a range of skills within digitization teams, including technological, project management and business expertise, and availability of resources to support hospital staff, were also highlighted.

conclusionsWe have identified a set of criteria for assessing digital excellence in hospitals. Our findings highlight the need to broaden the focus from technical functionalities to wider digital transformation capabilities.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareDelphi TechniqueHospitalsHumansTelemedicineDelphi techniquedigital excellencedigital maturityhospitals, eHealth

Identifiers

PMID32808938
PMCPMC7463397

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.