Linking informaticians and end users - Using the STARE-HI evaluation reporting framework as a unifying design approach

Studies in Health Technology and Informatics

Volumn 150, Issue , 2009, Pages 66-70

  Rigby, Michael ^a   Talmon, Jan ^b   Brender, Jytte ^c   Ammenwerth, Elske ^d   De Keizer, Nicolette F ^e   Nykänen, Pirkko ^f  

^a KEELE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^c AALBORG UNIVERSITY   (Denmark)

^d UNIVERSITY FOR HEALTH SCIENCES   (Austria)

^e ACADEMIC MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^f TAMPERE UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Finland)

Author keywords

Ethics; Evaluation; Health informatics; Objective design; Outcomes

Indexed keywords

PHILOSOPHICAL ASPECTS;

DESIGN APPROACHES; END USERS; ETHICS; EVALUATION; EVALUATION STUDY; HEALTH INFORMATICS; OUTCOMES;

HEALTH;

CONFERENCE PAPER; COOPERATION; ETHICS; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HOSPITAL ADMINISTRATOR; HOSPITAL INFORMATION SYSTEM; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; METHODOLOGY; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT;

COOPERATIVE BEHAVIOR; HOSPITAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; MEDICAL RECORD ADMINISTRATORS; PROGRAM EVALUATION;

EID: 72249102249     PISSN: 09269630     EISSN: 18798365     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.3233/978-1-60750-044-5-66     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (12)

1. Talmon, J., Ammenwerth, E., Brender, J. et al. (2009) STARE-HI-Statement on Reporting of Evaluation Studies in Health Informatics. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 1-9.
2. Edelstein, L. (2000) The Hippocratic oath: Text, translation, and interpretation. In Veatch, R.M. (Ed.) Cross-Cultural Perspectives in Medical Ethics. 2nd edition, Jones & Bartlett, Boston.
3. International Medical Informatics Association. The IMIA Code of Ethics for Health Information Professionals, www.imia.org/pubdocs/Ethics-Eng.pdf.
4. Anderson, J.G., Aydin, C.E. (1994) Overview - Theoretical perspectives and methodologies for the evaluation of health care information systems. In Anderson, J.G., Aydin, C.E., Jay, S.J. (Eds.) Evaluating Health Care Information Systems: Methods and Applications, Sage, Thousand Oaks, 5-29.
5. Poon, E.G. et al. (2004) Overcoming barriers to adopting and implementing computerized physician order entry systems in U.S. Hospitals. Health Affairs 23(4):184-190.
6. Ellis, K. (2008) Business Analysis Benchmark: The Impact of Business Requirements on the Success of Technology Projects. IAG Consulting, New Castle.
7. http://iig.umit.at/efmi/Bad Health Informatics. Can Kill
8. Ammenwerth, E., Shaw, N.T. (2005) Bad Health Informatics can Kill - Is Evaluation the Answer? Methods of Information in Medicine 44(1):1-3.
9. Rigby, M. (2001) Evaluation: 16 Powerful Reasons Why Not to Do It - and 6 Over-Riding Imperatives. In Patel, V. et al. (Eds.) Proceedings of MEDINFO 2001, IOS Press, Amsterdam, 1198-1202.
10. Ammenwerth, E. et al. (2004) Visions and strategies to improve evaluation of health information systems. Reflections and lessons based on the HIS-EVAL workshop in Innsbruck. International Journal of Medical Informatics 73(6):479-491.
11. http://www.equator-network.org/resource-centre/library-of-health- research-reporting/reportingguidelines/other-reporting-guidelines/.
12. Rigby, M. (2006) Essential Prerequisites to the Safe and Effective Roll-out of E-working in Healthcare. International Journal of Medical Informatics 75:138-147.