Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40424594›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2025

Health Information Exchange Usage in Japan: Content Analysis of Audit Logs.

Jun Suzumoto, Yukiko Mori, Tomohiro Kuroda

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
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

3 authors.

Jun Suzumoto *Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, 43 Shogoin-kawahara-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8507, Japan, 81 753667701, 81 753667704.ORCID 0009-0009-1522-5716
Yukiko Mori *Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, 43 Shogoin-kawahara-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8507, Japan, 81 753667701, 81 753667704.ORCID 0000-0001-9486-9505
Tomohiro Kuroda *Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, 43 Shogoin-kawahara-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8507, Japan, 81 753667701, 81 753667704.ORCID 0000-0003-1472-7203

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: In Japan, research on the types of medical data requested by health care workers in health information exchanges (HIEs) is limited. Examining the number of views for each data type is important to quantify its benefits. Objective: This study aimed to identify the types of medical data that are frequently viewed on demand using HIEs in Japan. Methods: We analyzed audit log data from two HIEs, Choukai Net and PicaPicaLink, covering the period from April 1, 2017, to March 31, 2022. First, we calculated the cumulative monthly usage days of the HIEs by each institution for the financial year (FY) 2021/22. Second, we calculated the cumulative annual usage days of the HIEs by each user type for FY 2021/22. Third, we calculated the view rate for each output field and content within each HIE, using institution type or year as the aggregation unit. Fourth, we calculated the cumulative annual usage days of the HIEs for days with and without progress note viewing, and for days without any content viewing. Fifth, we calculated the cumulative number of viewed days for content scheduled to be included in the national HIE compared to that which was not. Results: In 32.6% (47/144) of hospitals connected to Choukai Net and 2.3% (20/875) of hospitals connected to PicaPicaLink, cumulative monthly usage days exceeded 101. Additionally, in 32.4% (56/173) of visiting nursing stations connected to Choukai Net, cumulative monthly usage days were over 51. User types viewing HIEs were heavily biased toward institution types other than hospitals. The overall view rate for progress notes was highest among all content types, at 67.4% (83,476/123,915) for Choukai Net and 32.9% (26,159/79,612) for PicaPicaLink. In both HIEs, when comparing by institution type, the view rate for progress notes was highest for visiting nursing stations, reaching 91.8% (5553/6052) for Choukai Net and 65.3% (126/193) for PicaPicaLink. We also found that 17% (5417/31,944) of Choukai Net usage and 9.6% (1802/18,862) of PicaPicaLink usage involved referencing only progress notes in FY 2021/22. The view rate of content scheduled to be included in the national HIE was 45.6% (56,499/123,791) for Choukai Net and 47.7% (37,972/79,612) for PicaPicaLink. Conversely, the view rate for content not scheduled to be included in the national HIE was higher, at 80.2% (99,234/123,791) for Choukai Net and 56.6% (45,052/79,612) for PicaPicaLink. Conclusions: In both HIEs analyzed in this study, progress notes were the most viewed content. As more health care organizations disclose the progress notes they manage to their HIEs, progress notes are likely to be viewed more frequently. The cost-benefit of disclosing progress notes to HIEs remains unclear, and both health care providers and patients have concerns about privacy risks. Future research is needed to quantify and maximize the benefits of disclosure while mitigating the associated privacy risks.

Indexed as

Health Information ExchangeJapanAsiaauditaudit logaudit logsChoukai Netcontent analysishealth informationhealth information exchangeHIEID-LinkJapanmedical datanursingPicaPicaLinkquery-based exchangeuse

Identifiers

PMID40424594
PMCPMC12133072

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.