Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

Improving the quality of the evidence base of health informatics.

Authors: Jan, Talmon;

Improving the quality of the evidence base of health informatics.

Abstract

Evaluation of health informatics technology has had attention from quite a few researchers in health informatics in the last few decades. In the early nineties of the past century several working groups and research projects have discussed evaluation methods and methodologies. Despite these activities, evaluation of health informatics has not received the recognition it deserves. In this presentation we will reiterate the arguments put forward in the Declaration of Innsbruck to consider evaluation an essential element of the evidence base of health informatics. Not only are evaluation studies essential, it is also required that such studies are properly reported. A joint effort of the IMIA, EFMI and AMIA working groups on evaluation has resulted in a guideline for reporting the results of evaluation studies of health informatics applications (STARE-HI). STARE-HI is currently endorsed by EFMI. The general assembly of IMIA has adopted STARE-HI as an official IMIA document. Endorsement from AMIA is being sought. A pilot study in which STARE-HI was applied to assess the quality of current reporting clearly indicates that there is quite some room for improvement. Application of guidelines such as STARE-HI would contribute to a further improvement of the evidence base of health informatics and would open the road for high quality reviews and meta-analyses.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Evidence-Based Medicine, Quality Assurance, Health Care, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Medical Informatics, Netherlands

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!