Clinical information modeling processes for semantic interoperability of electronic health records: Systematic review and inductive analysis

Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association

Volumn 22, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 925-934

  Moreno Conde, Alberto ^a,b   Moner, David ^c   Da Cruz, Wellington Dimas ^d   Santos, Marcelo R ^e   Maldonado, José Alberto ^c,f   Robles, Montserrat ^c   Kalra, Dipak ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b HOSPITAL UNIVERSITARIO VIRGEN DEL ROCÍO   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSITAT POLITÈCNICA DE VALÈNCIA   (Spain)

^d FUMEC UNIVERSITY   (Brazil)

^e FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF MINAS GERAIS   (Brazil)

^f VeraTech for Health SL   (Spain)

Author keywords

Clinical information model; Clinical information modeling; Electronic health record; Semantic interoperability; Systematic review

Indexed keywords

CONTENT ANALYSIS; ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORD; HUMAN; INFORMATION MODEL; MEDLINE; NOMENCLATURE; PUBLICATION; RELIABILITY; REVIEW; SCIENCEDIRECT; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED VOCABULARY; ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORD; INFORMATION SYSTEM; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; SEMANTICS; SYSTEM ANALYSIS; THEORETICAL MODEL;

ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS; INFORMATION SYSTEMS; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; MODELS, THEORETICAL; SEMANTICS; SYSTEMS INTEGRATION; VOCABULARY, CONTROLLED;

EID: 84952325292     PISSN: 10675027     EISSN: 1527974X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jamia/ocv008     Document Type: Review

References (60)

1. Goossen W, Goossen-Baremans A, van der Zel M. Detailed clinical models: a review. Healthc Inform Res. 2010;16:201.
2. Beeler GW. HL7 Version 3 - An object-oriented methodology for collaborative standards development. Int J Med Inf. 1998;48:151-161.
3. Dolin RH, Alschuler L, Boyer S, et al. HL7 Clinical Document Architecture, Release 2. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2006;13:30-39.
4. Fast Health Interoperability Resources (FHIR). http://www.hl7. org/fhir/. Accessed July 18, 2014.
5. Beale T. Archetypes: constraint-based domain models for futureproof information systems. OOPSLA 2002 Workshop Behav Semant. 2002.
6. ISO 13606:2008 - Health informatics - Electronic health record communication. 2008. www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=40784.
7. OpenEHR. http://www.openehr.org/. Accessed July 18, 2014.
8. Clinical Information Modeling Initiative (CIMI). http://www.opencimi.org/. Accessed July 18, 2014.
9. Goossen WT. Using detailed clinical models to bridge the gap between clinicians and HIT. Stud Health Technol Inf. 2008;141:3-10.
10. Oniki TA, Coyle JF, Parker CG, et al. Lessons learned in detailed clinical modeling at Intermountain Healthcare. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014. Advance access published; doi:10.1136/amiajnl-2014-002875.
11. Jacobson I, Booch G, Rumbaugh J, et al. The Unified Software Development Process. Massachusetts, USA: Addison-Wesley Reading; 1999.
12. Ahn S, Huff SM, Kim Y, et al. Quality metrics for detailed clinical models. Int J Med Inf. 2013;82:408-417.
13. Kalra D. Editorial principles for the development of standards for the structure and content of health records. 2012. https://www.rcplondon.ac.uk/sites/default/files/documents/editorial-principles-for-the-development-of-record-standards. pdf. Accessed July 16, 2014.
14. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ. 2009;339:b2535.
15. Transparent reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA). http://www.prisma-statement.org/. Accessed July 18, 2014.
16. US National Library of Medicine. http://www.pubmed.gov. Accessed July 18, 2014.
17. IEEE Xplore Digital Library. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/. Accessed July 18, 2014.
18. ScienceDirect. http://www.sciencedirect.com/. Accessed July 18, 2014.
19. Elo S, Kyngäs H. The qualitative content analysis process. J Adv Nurs. 2008; 62:107-115.
20. Rinner C, Kohler M, Hübner-Bloder G, et al. Creating ISO/EN 13606 archetypes based on clinical information needs. In: Proceedings of EFMI Special Topic Conference, 14-15 April 2011, Laško, Slovenia e-Health Across Borders Without Boundaries. 2011:14-15.
21. Muñoz Carrero A, Romero Gutiérrez A, Marco Cuenca G, et al. Manual práctico de interoperabilidad semántica para entornos sanitarios basada en arquetipos. Unidad de investigación en Telemedicina y e-Salud. Instituto de Salud Carlos III - Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad. 2013.
22. Kalra D. Editorial principles for the development of standards for the structure and content of health records. 2012. https://www.rcplondon.ac.uk/sites/default/files/documents/editorial-principles-for-the-development-ofrecord-standards.pdf. Accessed July 18, 2015.
23. Yuksel M, Dogac A. Interoperability of medical device information and the clinical applications: An HL7 RMIM based on the ISO/IEEE 11073 DIM. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed. 2011;15:557-566.
24. Nagy M, Hanzlicek P, Precková P, et al. Semantic interoperability in Czech healthcare environment supported by HL7 version 3. Methods Inf Med. 2010;49:186.
25. Lopez DM, Blobel BG. A development framework for semantically interoperable health information systems. Int J Med Inf. 2009;78:83-103.
26. Lopez DM, Blobel B. Enhanced semantic interoperability by profiling health informatics standards. Methods Inf Med. 2009;48:170-177.
27. Lopez DM, Blobel B. Enhanced semantic interpretability by healthcare standards profiling. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2008;136:735.
28. Knaup P, Garde S, Haux R. Systematic planning of patient records for cooperative care and multicenter research. Int J Med Inf. 2007;76:109-117.
29. Goossen WT, Ozbolt JG, Coenen A, et al. Development of a provisional domain model for the nursing process for use within the Health Level 7 reference information model. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2004;11:186-194.
30. Anderson HV, Weintraub WS, Radford MJ, et al. Standardized cardiovascular data for clinical research, registries, and patient care. A report from the Data Standards Workgroup of the National Cardiovascular Research Infrastructure Project. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:1835-1846.
31. Jian W-S, Hsu C-Y, Hao T-H, et al. Building a portable data and information interoperability infrastructure - framework for a standard Taiwan Electronic Medical Record Template. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2007;88: 102-111.
32. Spigolon DN, Moro CMC. Essential data set's archetypes for nursing care of endometriosis patients. Rev Gaúcha Enferm. 2012;33:22-32.
33. Späth MB, Grimson J. Applying the archetype approach to the database of a biobank information management system. Int J Med Inf. 2011;80:205-226.
34. Smith K, Kalra D. Electronic health records in complementary and alternative medicine. Int J Med Inf. 2008;77:576-588.
35. Santos MR, Bax MP, Kalra D. Dealing with the archetypes development process for a regional EHR system. Appl Clin Inform. 2012;3:258-275.
36. Moner D, Moreno A, Maldonado JA, et al. Using archetypes for defining CDA templates. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2012;180:53-57.
37. Moner D, Maldonado JA, Boscá D, et al. CEN EN13606 normalisation framework implementation experiences. In: Seamless Care, Safe Care: The Challenges of Interoperability and Patient Safety in Health Care: Proceedings of the EFMI Special Topic Conference, June 2-4, 2010; Reykjavik, Iceland. IOS Press; 2010: 136.
38. Marcos M, Maldonado JA, Martínez-Salvador B, et al. Interoperability of clinical decision-support systems and electronic health records using archetypes: a case study in clinical trial eligibility. J Biomed Inform. 2013;46:676-689.
39. Leslie H. International developments in openEHR archetypes and templates. Health Inf Manag J. 2008;37:38.
40. Kohl CD, Garde S, Knaup P. Facilitating secondary use of medical data by using openEHR archetypes. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2009;160:1117-1121.
41. Garde S, Hovenga E, Buck J, et al. Expressing clinical data sets with openEHR archetypes: a solid basis for ubiquitous computing. Int J Med Inf. 2007;76(Suppl. 3):S334-S341.
42. Garcia D, Moro CM, Cicogna PE, et al. Method to integrate clinical guidelines into the electronic health record (EHR) by applying the archetypes approach. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2012;192:871-875.
43. Duftschmid G, Rinner C, Kohler M, et al. The EHR-ARCHE project: satisfying clinical information needs in a shared electronic health record system based on IHE XDS and archetypes. Int J Med Inf. 2013;82:1195-1207.
44. Dias RD, Cook TW, Freire SM. Modeling healthcare authorization and claim submissions using the openEHR dual-model approach. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2011;11:60.
45. Buck J, Garde S, Kohl CD, et al. Towards a comprehensive electronic patient record to support an innovative individual care concept for premature infants using the openEHR approach. Int J Med Inf. 2009;78:521-531.
46. Puentes J, Roux M, Montagner J, et al. Development framework for a patientcentered record. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2012;108:1036-1051.
47. Liu D, Wang X, Pan F, et al. Harmonization of health data at national level: a pilot study in China. Int J Med Inf. 2010;79:450-458.
48. Liu D, Wang X, Pan F, et al. Web-based infectious disease reporting using XML forms. Int J Med Inf. 2008;77:630-640.
49. Kim Y, Park H-A. Development and validation of detailed clinical models for nursing problems in perinatal care. Appl Clin Inform. 2011;2:225-239.
50. Khan WA, Hussain M, Afzal M, et al. Personalized-detailed clinical model for data interoperability among clinical standards. Telemed E-Health. 2013;19: 632-642.
51. Jing X, Kay S, Marley T, et al. Incorporating personalized gene sequence variants, molecular genetics knowledge, and health knowledge into an EHR prototype based on the Continuity of Care Record standard. J Biomed Inform. 2012;45:82-92.
52. Hsu W, Taira RK, El-Saden S, et al. Context-based electronic health record: toward patient specific healthcare. Inf Technol Biomed IEEE Trans On. 2012;16:228-234.
53. Hoy D, Hardiker NR, McNicoll IT, et al. Collaborative development of clinical templates as a national resource. Int J Med Inf. 2009;78:S3-S8.
54. Buyl R, Nyssen M. Structured electronic physiotherapy records. Int J Med Inf. 2009;78:473-481.
55. D'Amore JD, Mandel JC, Kreda DA, et al. Are Meaningful Use Stage 2 certified EHRs ready for interoperability? Findings from the SMART C-CDA Collaborative. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014. Advance access published; doi:10.1136/amiajnl-2014-002883.
56. Kalra D, Tapuria A, Austin T, et al. Quality requirements for EHR archetypes. In: MIE; 2012: 48-52.
57. Garde S, Hovenga EJ, Gränz J, et al. Managing archetypes for sustainable and semantically interoperable electronic health records. Electron J Health Inform. 2007;2:e9.
58. Madsen M, Leslie H, Hovenga EJS, et al. Sustainable clinical knowledge management: an archetype development life cycle. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2010;151:115-132.
59. Kohl CD, Garde S, Knaup P. Facilitating the openEHR approach-organizational structures for defining high-quality archetypes. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2008;136:437.
60. Stroetmann VN, Kalra D, Lewalle P, et al. Semantic interoperability for better health and safer healthcare. European Commission, Directorate-General Information Society and Media; 2009. http://dx.doi.org/10.2759/38514.