ArticleApplied clinical informatics2022
Evaluating Digital Health Capability at Scale Using the Digital Health Indicator.
Article in Applied clinical informatics, 2022. 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.
- The Flow of Healthcare Information in Rural and Remote Settings: A Qualitative Approach.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2026Article
- Large-scale system-level digitalisation initiatives in the National Health Service in England: insights from three national evaluations.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Assessing Digital Maturity of Hospitals: Viewpoint Comparing National Approaches in Five Countries.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Evaluating digital maturity in public health systems: a statewide cross-sectional analysis of digital public health capacity in Missouri.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Strengthening rural healthcare outcomes through digital health: qualitative multi-site case study.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- The right care in the right place: a scoping review of digital health education and training for rural healthcare workers.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Level of implementation of digital transformation in dental radiology centers in Metropolitan Lima: A cross-sectional study.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2024Article
- The Information and Communication Technology Maturity Assessment at Primary Health Care Services Across 9 Provinces in Indonesia: Evaluation Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2024Article
- Big 5 Personality Traits and Individual- and Practice-Related Characteristics as Influencing Factors of Digital Maturity in General Practices: Quantitative Web-Based Survey Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Review
- The Role of Human and Organizational Factors in the Pursuit of One Digital Health.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2023Article
- Leveraging Data and Technology to Enhance Interdisciplinary Collaboration and Health Outcomes.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2023Review
- Perceived Impact of Digital Health Maturity on Patient Experience, Population Health, Health Care Costs, and Provider Experience: Mixed Methods Case Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHealth service providers must understand their digital health capability if they are to drive digital transformation in a strategic and informed manner. Little is known about the assessment and benchmarking of digital maturity or capability at scale across an entire jurisdiction. The public health care system across the state of Queensland, Australia has an ambitious 10-year digital transformation strategy.
objectiveThe aim of this research was to evaluate the digital health capability in Queensland to inform digital health strategy and investment.
methodsThe Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society Digital Health Indicator (DHI) was used via a cross-sectional survey design to assess four core dimensions of digital health transformation: governance and workforce; interoperability; person-enabled health; and predictive analytics across an entire jurisdiction simultaneously. The DHI questionnaire was completed by each health care system (
resultsThe results reveal a variation in DHI scores reflecting the diverse stages of health care digitization across the state. The average DHI score across sites was 143 (range 78-193; SD35.3) which is similar to other systems in the Oceania region and global public systems but below the global private average. Governance and workforce was on average the highest scoring dimension (x̅= 54), followed by interoperability (x̅ = 46), person-enabled health (x̅ = 36), and predictive analytics (x̅ = 30).
conclusionThe findings were incorporated into the new digital health strategy for the jurisdiction. As one of the largest single simultaneous assessments of digital health capability globally, the findings and lessons learnt offer insights for policy makers and organizational managers.
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.