Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42684811›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2026

Lithuania's National Digital Health System Architecture, Evolution, and Lessons From a Centralized Approach Using Longitudinal Document Analysis: Descriptive National Case Study.

Austėja Dapkutė, Olegas Niakšu, Julius Juodakis, Danguolė Jankauskienė, Justas Trinkūnas, Arvydas Laurinavičius, Tomas Jovaiša, Donata Ringaitienė, Martyna Atraškevičienė, Rytis Masiliūnas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

10 authors.

Austėja DapkutėClinic of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.ORCID 0000-0001-7508-0971
Olegas NiakšuCenter for Digital Medicine, Institute of Translational Health Research, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.ORCID 0000-0003-1329-8945
Julius JuodakisCenter for Digital Medicine, Institute of Translational Health Research, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.ORCID 0000-0001-5600-974X
Danguolė JankauskienėHealth Research Laboratory, Mykolas Romeris University, Vilnius, Lithuania.ORCID 0000-0003-0364-5819
Justas TrinkūnasCenter for Digital Medicine, Institute of Translational Health Research, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.ORCID 0000-0002-6559-049X
Arvydas LaurinavičiusCenter for Digital Medicine, Institute of Translational Health Research, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.ORCID 0000-0001-9232-1730
Tomas JovaišaClinic of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.ORCID 0000-0002-0229-5100
Donata RingaitienėClinic of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.ORCID 0000-0002-7141-8768
Martyna AtraškevičienėInnovation and Technology Transfer Department, Vilnius University Hospital Santaros Klinikos, Vilnius, Lithuania.ORCID 0009-0002-0104-7743
Rytis MasiliūnasClinic of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.ORCID 0000-0002-8033-9682

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNational digital health systems are increasingly recognized as a key tool for strengthening health care systems and improving patient outcomes. Global guidance from the World Health Organization and European Union initiatives emphasizes interoperability, robust data governance, and secure exchange of health information as prerequisites for system-wide benefits. However, translating these principles into operational national digital health infrastructures remains challenging, and empirical evidence on long-term, centralized implementation models is limited. Lithuania is among a small number of European countries that have implemented a fully centralized national digital health platform (DHP), providing a valuable case for examining the development, structure, and performance of such systems.

objectiveThis study aimed to describe and analyze Lithuania's national digital health system across its historical development, governance, technical architecture, interoperability and adoption, and to identify challenges and lessons learned.

methodsWe conducted a descriptive national case study of Lithuania's digital health system using longitudinal document analysis. Publicly available policy documents, legislation, strategy reports, audits, and official statistics published between 2000 and 2025 were systematically reviewed following the readying, extracting, analyzing, and distilling (READ) framework. Thematic analysis was applied to examine governance, system architecture, interoperability, adoption, and implementation challenges. Peer-reviewed literature was used for contextualization.

resultsLithuania's digital health system evolved from fragmented initiatives in the early 2000s into a fully centralized national DHP that has been operational nationwide since 2015. Since 2018, health care providers have been required to record core clinical data electronically, and all reimbursed medicines are prescribed exclusively through the national electronic prescription system. The DHP integrates electronic health records, electronic prescription system, appointment booking, and other national subsystems with standardized interfaces. System use expanded rapidly: the annual number of electronic documents stored in the DHP increased from approximately 7 million in 2017 to over 100 million in 2024, reflecting widespread uptake of outpatient documentation, referrals, and prescriptions. Patient-facing services, including online access to records and a nationwide appointment booking system, also expanded, although patient-initiated use remains uneven across regions. The platform supports secure primary use for care delivery and secondary use of health data through a centralized access pathway. While core services have reached national scale, some subsystems, such as imaging exchange and telemedicine, remain less mature. Ongoing modernization focuses on improving data interoperability, enabling advanced analytics and future AI-based services, strengthening cross-border eHealth services, and extending coverage to sensitive and previously excluded domains such as mental health, maternal, and newborn care through dedicated subsystems.

conclusionsLithuania's centralized digital health system illustrates both the potential and the limitations of national-scale integration driven by legal mandates and standardized interoperability. Its experience provides transferable insights for health systems seeking to consolidate fragmented infrastructures while maintaining data security, regulatory compliance, and long-term system adaptability.

Indexed as

Digital HealthDelivery of Health CareElectronic Health RecordsHumansLithuaniaLongitudinal Studiesdigital healthdigital health platformeHealthelectronic health recordshealth information systems

Identifiers

PMID42684811
PMCPMC13583467

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.