Harmonizing routinely collected health information for strengthening quality management in health systems: Requirements and practice

Journal of Health Services Research and Policy

Volumn 21, Issue 4, 2016, Pages 223-228

  Prodinger, Birgit ^a,b,c   Tennant, Alan ^a,d   Stucki, Gerold ^a,b,c   Cieza, Alarcos ^e   Üstün, Tevfik Bedirhan ^f  

^a SWISS PARAPLEGIC RESEARCH   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LUCERNE   (Switzerland)

^c WHO Collaborating Centre for the Family of International Classifications in Germany (at DIMDI)   (Switzerland)

^d UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

^e UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

^f WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Decision making; Health classifications; Health status measurement; Information standards; Quality management

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; DECISION MAKING; HEALTH ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRE; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH STATUS; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; INTERNATIONAL CLASSIFICATION OF FUNCTIONING, DISABILITY AND HEALTH; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; MEDICAL INFORMATION; MEDICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLIC HEALTH; SELF CARE; SHORT FORM 36; WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION; DAILY LIFE ACTIVITY; DISABILITY; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INTERNATIONAL CLASSIFICATION OF DISEASES; QUESTIONNAIRE; STANDARDS;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; DATA COLLECTION; DISABILITY EVALUATION; HEALTH INFORMATION SYSTEMS; HUMANS; INTERNATIONAL CLASSIFICATION OF DISEASES; SELF CARE; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 84994834792     PISSN: 13558196     EISSN: 17581060     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1355819616636411     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Pourbohloul B and Kieny M-P. Complex systems analysis: towards holistic approaches to health systems planning and policy. Bull WHO 2011; 89: 242
2. AbouZahr C and Boerma T. Health information systems: the foundations of public health. Bull WHO 2005; 83: 578-583
3. WHO. International classification of functioning, disability and health. Geneva: WHO, 2001
4. Castrejon I, Carmona L, Agrinier N, et al. The EULAR outcome measures library: development and an example from a systematic review for systemic lupus erythematous instruments. Clin Exp Rheumatol. Epub ahead of print 23 March 2015
5. Van Buuren S, Eyres S, Tennant A, et al. Assessing comparability of dressing disability in different countries by response conversion. Eur J Public Health 2003; 13: 15-19
6. Fayed N, De Camargo OK, Kerr E, et al. Generic patient-reported outcomes in child health research: a review of conceptual content using World Health Organization definitions. Dev Med Child Neurol 2012; 54: 1085-1095
7. BSI. Health informatics-requirements for an electronic health record architecture. BS ISO 18308:2011. UK: BSI, 2011
8. ISO. Health informatics-capacity-based eHealth architecture roadmap. Part 2: architectural components and maturity model. PD ISO/TR 14639-2:2014. UK: ISO, 2014
9. BSI. Health care services-quality management systems. Requirements based on EN ISO 9001:2008. UK: BSI, 2012
10. Bond TG and Fox CM. Applying the Rasch model: fundamental measurement in the human sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc, 2007
11. Rasch G. Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Copenhagen: Danish National Institute for Educational Research, 1960
12. Rasch G. On specific objectivity: an attempt at formalizing the request for generality and validity of scientific statements. In: Glegved M (ed.) The Danish yearbook of philosophy. Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1977
13. Engelhard G Jr, Invariant measurement: using Rasch models in the social, behavioral, and health sciences. New York: Routledge, 2013
14. Andrich D. Rasch models for measurement. Sage University Paper Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, Series no 07-068, 1988. Newbury Park, California: Sage Publications
15. Cieza A, Fayed N, Bickenbach J and Prodinger B. Refinements to the ICF linking rules to strenghten their potential for establishing comparability of health information. Disabil & Rehabil 2016, in press
16. Tennant A, McKenna SP and Hagell PH. Application of Rasch analysis in the development and application of quality of life instruments. Value Health 2004; 7: S22-S26
17. Christensen KB, Kreiner S and Meshab M (eds). Rasch models in health. London: ISTE Ltd and John Wiley & Sons Inc, 2013
18. Fear J, Hillman M, Chamberlain M, et al. Prevalence of hip problems in the population aged 55 years and over: access to specialist care and future demand for hip arthroplasty. Rheumatology 1997; 36: 74-76
19. Linacre M. Sample size and item calibration stability. Rasch Meas Trans 1994; 7: 328
20. Ware JE Jr, SF-36 health survey update. Spine 2000; 25: 3130-3139
21. Bruce B and Fries JF. The health assessment questionnaire (HAQ). Clin Exp Rheumatol 2005; 23: S14-S18
22. Lequesne M, Mery C, Samson M, et al. Indexes of severity for osteoarthritis of the hip and knee: validation-value in comparison with other assessment tests. Scand J Rheumatol 1987; 16: 85-89
23. Andrich D. A rating formulation for ordered response categories. Psychometrika 1978; 43: 561-573
24. Andrich D, Sheridan B and Luo G. Rasch models for measurement: RUMM 2030. Perth, Western Australia: RUMM Laboratory Pty Ltd, 2010
25. La Porta F, Franceschini M, Caselli S, et al. Unified balance scale: an activity-based, bed to community, and aetiology-independent measure of balance calibrated with Rasch analysis. J Rehabil Med 2011; 43: 435-444
26. Chang S, Gholizadeh L, Salamonson Y, et al. Health span or life span: the role of patient-reported outcomes in informing health policy. Health Policy 2011; 100: 96-104
27. Andrich D. Rating scales and Rasch measurement. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2011; 11: 571-585
28. Reise SP and Waller NG. Item response theory and the measurement of clinical change. J Pers Assess 2005; 84: 228-238
29. Tennant A, Penta M, Tesio L, et al. Assessing and adjusting for cross-cultural validity of impairment and activity limitation scales through differential item functioning within the framework of the Rasch model: the PROESOR project. Med Care 2004; 42: I37-I48.