SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2022
Standards, Processes, and Tools Used to Evaluate the Quality of Health Information Systems: Systematic Literature Review.
Synthesis in Journal of medical Internet research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Electronic health records: managerial insights from an umbrella review.BMC health services research · 2026Pooled it
- Development and Psychometric Validation of a Usability Instrument Based on ISO 25010 for Electronic Health Record Systems in Peruvian Health Care Settings: Methodological Study.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
- Factors associated with false-positive screening mammography in São Paulo, Brazil.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- COVID-19 health information system assessments in eight European countries: identified gaps, best practices and recommendations.European journal of public health · 2024Article
- Co-design of a Mobile App for Engaging Breast Cancer Patients in Reporting Health Experiences: Qualitative Case Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Assessment of the quality of online information on dietary recommendations for inflammatory bowel disease.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEvaluating health information system (HIS) quality is strategically advantageous for improving the quality of patient care. Nevertheless, few systematic studies have reported what methods, such as standards, processes, and tools, were proposed to evaluate HIS quality.
objectiveThis study aimed to identify and discuss the existing literature that describes standards, processes, and tools used to evaluate HIS quality.
methodsWe conducted a systematic literature review using review guidelines focused on software and systems. We examined seven electronic databases-Scopus, ACM (Association for Computing Machinery), ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, IEEE Xplore, Web of Science, and PubMed-to search for and select primary studies.
resultsOut of 782 papers, we identified 17 (2.2%) primary studies. We found that most of the primary studies addressed quality evaluation from a management perspective. On the other hand, there was little explicit and pragmatic evidence on the processes and tools that allowed for the evaluation of HIS quality.
conclusionsTo promote quality evaluation of HISs, it is necessary to define mechanisms and methods that operationalize the standards in HISs. Additionally, it is necessary to create metrics that measure the quality of the most critical components and processes of HISs.
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.