ArticleLearning health systems2025
The surprising politics of learning health systems.
Article in Learning health systems, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Implementing Equitable Hypertension Care Using a Remote Patient Monitoring Program: A Mixed Methods Study.JACC. Advances · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence for Cardiovascular Care in Action: From Learning to Implementation in Health Systems.JACC. Advances · 2025Review
- The surprising politics of learning health systems.Learning health systems · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Learning Health Systems (LHS) are an increasingly common element of health policy reform efforts in a number of jurisdictions. There is little disagreement around the LHS vision, and early adopters provide some development guidance. Despite the attractiveness of the LHS vision, progress on adoption by systems remains slow. In this commentary, we consider one potential reason, namely politics, or the ways in which government bodies, interest groups, and political ideas shape structures and policies. LHS can change the ways that health systems work and interact with payors and populations and thereby create political challenges. The need for upfront new investment to build capacity for LHS activities, the creation of new partnerships or collaborations, increased transparency, and the direct engagement of populations can all create political risks and subsequent barriers. With a broad population health focus that extends across typical political cycles, politics may create an even greater barrier. We suggest that building strong engagement, clear and transparent accountabilities, communities of practice and other vehicles to promote data sharing and transparency, and careful attention to risk management may all help reduce political challenges. Some sets of policies-like value-based care-can support these sorts of changes and accelerate the adoption of LHS.
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.