Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35353050›Full record

SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2022

Synthesizing Dimensions of Digital Maturity in Hospitals: Systematic Review.

Rhona Duncan, Rebekah Eden, Leanna Woods, Ides Wong, Clair Sullivan

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

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 34 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Digital Health Data Quality Issues: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023
    Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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.

Rhona DuncanSchool of Information Systems, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3763-7630
Rebekah EdenSchool of Information Systems, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6228-7241
Leanna WoodsCentre for Health Services Research, The University of Queensland, Herston, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4811-4608
Ides WongClinical Excellence Queensland, Queensland Health, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5296-4336
Clair SullivanCentre for Health Services Research, The University of Queensland, Herston, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2475-9989

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDigital health in hospital settings is viewed as a panacea for achieving the "quadruple aim" of health care, yet the outcomes have been largely inconclusive. To optimize digital health outcomes, a strategic approach is necessary, requiring digital maturity assessments. However, current approaches to assessing digital maturity have been largely insufficient, with uncertainty surrounding the dimensions to assess.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to identify the current dimensions used to assess the digital maturity of hospitals.

methodsA systematic literature review was conducted of peer-reviewed literature (published before December 2020) investigating maturity models used to assess the digital maturity of hospitals. A total of 29 relevant articles were retrieved, representing 27 distinct maturity models. The articles were inductively analyzed, and the maturity model dimensions were extracted and consolidated into a maturity model framework.

resultsThe consolidated maturity model framework consisted of 7 dimensions: strategy; information technology capability; interoperability; governance and management; patient-centered care; people, skills, and behavior; and data analytics. These 7 dimensions can be evaluated based on 24 respective indicators.

conclusionsThe maturity model framework developed for this study can be used to assess digital maturity and identify areas for improvement.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareHospitalsHumanscapability modeldigital capabilitydigital hospitalsdigital maturityeHealthelectronic medical recordsliterature reviewmaturity model

Identifiers

PMID35353050
PMCPMC9008527

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.