Cargando…

Assessment of Clinical Information Quality in Digital Health Technologies: International eDelphi Study

BACKGROUND: Digital health technologies (DHTs), such as electronic health records and prescribing systems, are transforming health care delivery around the world. The quality of information in DHTs is key to the quality and safety of care. We developed a novel clinical information quality (CLIQ) fra...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fadahunsi, Kayode Philip, Wark, Petra A, Mastellos, Nikolaos, Neves, Ana Luisa, Gallagher, Joseph, Majeed, Azeem, Webster, Andrew, Smith, Anthony, Choo-Kang, Brian, Leon, Catherine, Edwards, Christopher, O'Shea, Conor, Heitz, Elizabeth, Kayode, Olamide Valentine, Nash, Makeba, Kowalski, Martin, Jiwani, Mateen, O'Callaghan, Michael Edmund, Zary, Nabil, Henderson, Nicola, Chavannes, Niels H, Čivljak, Rok, Olubiyi, Olubunmi Abiola, Mahapatra, Piyush, Panday, Rishi Nannan, Oriji, Sunday O, Fox, Tatiana Erlikh, Faint, Victoria, Car, Josip
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: JMIR Publications 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9768639/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36472901
http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/41889
_version_ 1784854215609286656
author Fadahunsi, Kayode Philip
Wark, Petra A
Mastellos, Nikolaos
Neves, Ana Luisa
Gallagher, Joseph
Majeed, Azeem
Webster, Andrew
Smith, Anthony
Choo-Kang, Brian
Leon, Catherine
Edwards, Christopher
O'Shea, Conor
Heitz, Elizabeth
Kayode, Olamide Valentine
Nash, Makeba
Kowalski, Martin
Jiwani, Mateen
O'Callaghan, Michael Edmund
Zary, Nabil
Henderson, Nicola
Chavannes, Niels H
Čivljak, Rok
Olubiyi, Olubunmi Abiola
Mahapatra, Piyush
Panday, Rishi Nannan
Oriji, Sunday O
Fox, Tatiana Erlikh
Faint, Victoria
Car, Josip
author_facet Fadahunsi, Kayode Philip
Wark, Petra A
Mastellos, Nikolaos
Neves, Ana Luisa
Gallagher, Joseph
Majeed, Azeem
Webster, Andrew
Smith, Anthony
Choo-Kang, Brian
Leon, Catherine
Edwards, Christopher
O'Shea, Conor
Heitz, Elizabeth
Kayode, Olamide Valentine
Nash, Makeba
Kowalski, Martin
Jiwani, Mateen
O'Callaghan, Michael Edmund
Zary, Nabil
Henderson, Nicola
Chavannes, Niels H
Čivljak, Rok
Olubiyi, Olubunmi Abiola
Mahapatra, Piyush
Panday, Rishi Nannan
Oriji, Sunday O
Fox, Tatiana Erlikh
Faint, Victoria
Car, Josip
author_sort Fadahunsi, Kayode Philip
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Digital health technologies (DHTs), such as electronic health records and prescribing systems, are transforming health care delivery around the world. The quality of information in DHTs is key to the quality and safety of care. We developed a novel clinical information quality (CLIQ) framework to assess the quality of clinical information in DHTs. OBJECTIVE: This study explored clinicians’ perspectives on the relevance, definition, and assessment of information quality dimensions in the CLIQ framework. METHODS: We used a systematic and iterative eDelphi approach to engage clinicians who had information governance roles or personal interest in information governance; the clinicians were recruited through purposive and snowball sampling techniques. Data were collected using semistructured online questionnaires until consensus was reached on the information quality dimensions in the CLIQ framework. Responses on the relevance of the dimensions were summarized to inform decisions on retention of the dimensions according to prespecified rules. Thematic analysis of the free-text responses was used to revise definitions and the assessment of dimensions. RESULTS: Thirty-five clinicians from 10 countries participated in the study, which was concluded after the second round. Consensus was reached on all dimensions and categories in the CLIQ framework: informativeness (accuracy, completeness, interpretability, plausibility, provenance, and relevance), availability (accessibility, portability, security, and timeliness), and usability (conformance, consistency, and maintainability). A new dimension, searchability, was introduced in the availability category to account for the ease of finding needed information in the DHTs. Certain dimensions were renamed, and some definitions were rephrased to improve clarity. CONCLUSIONS: The CLIQ framework reached a high expert consensus and clarity of language relating to the information quality dimensions. The framework can be used by health care managers and institutions as a pragmatic tool for identifying and forestalling information quality problems that could compromise patient safety and quality of care. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057430
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9768639
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher JMIR Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97686392022-12-22 Assessment of Clinical Information Quality in Digital Health Technologies: International eDelphi Study Fadahunsi, Kayode Philip Wark, Petra A Mastellos, Nikolaos Neves, Ana Luisa Gallagher, Joseph Majeed, Azeem Webster, Andrew Smith, Anthony Choo-Kang, Brian Leon, Catherine Edwards, Christopher O'Shea, Conor Heitz, Elizabeth Kayode, Olamide Valentine Nash, Makeba Kowalski, Martin Jiwani, Mateen O'Callaghan, Michael Edmund Zary, Nabil Henderson, Nicola Chavannes, Niels H Čivljak, Rok Olubiyi, Olubunmi Abiola Mahapatra, Piyush Panday, Rishi Nannan Oriji, Sunday O Fox, Tatiana Erlikh Faint, Victoria Car, Josip J Med Internet Res Original Paper BACKGROUND: Digital health technologies (DHTs), such as electronic health records and prescribing systems, are transforming health care delivery around the world. The quality of information in DHTs is key to the quality and safety of care. We developed a novel clinical information quality (CLIQ) framework to assess the quality of clinical information in DHTs. OBJECTIVE: This study explored clinicians’ perspectives on the relevance, definition, and assessment of information quality dimensions in the CLIQ framework. METHODS: We used a systematic and iterative eDelphi approach to engage clinicians who had information governance roles or personal interest in information governance; the clinicians were recruited through purposive and snowball sampling techniques. Data were collected using semistructured online questionnaires until consensus was reached on the information quality dimensions in the CLIQ framework. Responses on the relevance of the dimensions were summarized to inform decisions on retention of the dimensions according to prespecified rules. Thematic analysis of the free-text responses was used to revise definitions and the assessment of dimensions. RESULTS: Thirty-five clinicians from 10 countries participated in the study, which was concluded after the second round. Consensus was reached on all dimensions and categories in the CLIQ framework: informativeness (accuracy, completeness, interpretability, plausibility, provenance, and relevance), availability (accessibility, portability, security, and timeliness), and usability (conformance, consistency, and maintainability). A new dimension, searchability, was introduced in the availability category to account for the ease of finding needed information in the DHTs. Certain dimensions were renamed, and some definitions were rephrased to improve clarity. CONCLUSIONS: The CLIQ framework reached a high expert consensus and clarity of language relating to the information quality dimensions. The framework can be used by health care managers and institutions as a pragmatic tool for identifying and forestalling information quality problems that could compromise patient safety and quality of care. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057430 JMIR Publications 2022-12-06 /pmc/articles/PMC9768639/ /pubmed/36472901 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/41889 Text en ©Kayode Philip Fadahunsi, Petra A Wark, Nikolaos Mastellos, Ana Luisa Neves, Joseph Gallagher, Azeem Majeed, Andrew Webster, Anthony Smith, Brian Choo-Kang, Catherine Leon, Christopher Edwards, Conor O'Shea, Elizabeth Heitz, Olamide Valentine Kayode, Makeba Nash, Martin Kowalski, Mateen Jiwani, Michael Edmund O'Callaghan, Nabil Zary, Nicola Henderson, Niels H Chavannes, Rok Čivljak, Olubunmi Abiola Olubiyi, Piyush Mahapatra, Rishi Nannan Panday, Sunday O Oriji, Tatiana Erlikh Fox, Victoria Faint, Josip Car. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 06.12.2022. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://www.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.
spellingShingle Original Paper
Fadahunsi, Kayode Philip
Wark, Petra A
Mastellos, Nikolaos
Neves, Ana Luisa
Gallagher, Joseph
Majeed, Azeem
Webster, Andrew
Smith, Anthony
Choo-Kang, Brian
Leon, Catherine
Edwards, Christopher
O'Shea, Conor
Heitz, Elizabeth
Kayode, Olamide Valentine
Nash, Makeba
Kowalski, Martin
Jiwani, Mateen
O'Callaghan, Michael Edmund
Zary, Nabil
Henderson, Nicola
Chavannes, Niels H
Čivljak, Rok
Olubiyi, Olubunmi Abiola
Mahapatra, Piyush
Panday, Rishi Nannan
Oriji, Sunday O
Fox, Tatiana Erlikh
Faint, Victoria
Car, Josip
Assessment of Clinical Information Quality in Digital Health Technologies: International eDelphi Study
title Assessment of Clinical Information Quality in Digital Health Technologies: International eDelphi Study
title_full Assessment of Clinical Information Quality in Digital Health Technologies: International eDelphi Study
title_fullStr Assessment of Clinical Information Quality in Digital Health Technologies: International eDelphi Study
title_full_unstemmed Assessment of Clinical Information Quality in Digital Health Technologies: International eDelphi Study
title_short Assessment of Clinical Information Quality in Digital Health Technologies: International eDelphi Study
title_sort assessment of clinical information quality in digital health technologies: international edelphi study
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9768639/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36472901
http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/41889
work_keys_str_mv AT fadahunsikayodephilip assessmentofclinicalinformationqualityindigitalhealthtechnologiesinternationaledelphistudy
AT warkpetraa assessmentofclinicalinformationqualityindigitalhealthtechnologiesinternationaledelphistudy
AT mastellosnikolaos assessmentofclinicalinformationqualityindigitalhealthtechnologiesinternationaledelphistudy
AT nevesanaluisa assessmentofclinicalinformationqualityindigitalhealthtechnologiesinternationaledelphistudy
AT gallagherjoseph assessmentofclinicalinformationqualityindigitalhealthtechnologiesinternationaledelphistudy
AT majeedazeem assessmentofclinicalinformationqualityindigitalhealthtechnologiesinternationaledelphistudy
AT websterandrew assessmentofclinicalinformationqualityindigitalhealthtechnologiesinternationaledelphistudy
AT smithanthony assessmentofclinicalinformationqualityindigitalhealthtechnologiesinternationaledelphistudy
AT chookangbrian assessmentofclinicalinformationqualityindigitalhealthtechnologiesinternationaledelphistudy
AT leoncatherine assessmentofclinicalinformationqualityindigitalhealthtechnologiesinternationaledelphistudy
AT edwardschristopher assessmentofclinicalinformationqualityindigitalhealthtechnologiesinternationaledelphistudy
AT osheaconor assessmentofclinicalinformationqualityindigitalhealthtechnologiesinternationaledelphistudy
AT heitzelizabeth assessmentofclinicalinformationqualityindigitalhealthtechnologiesinternationaledelphistudy
AT kayodeolamidevalentine assessmentofclinicalinformationqualityindigitalhealthtechnologiesinternationaledelphistudy
AT nashmakeba assessmentofclinicalinformationqualityindigitalhealthtechnologiesinternationaledelphistudy
AT kowalskimartin assessmentofclinicalinformationqualityindigitalhealthtechnologiesinternationaledelphistudy
AT jiwanimateen assessmentofclinicalinformationqualityindigitalhealthtechnologiesinternationaledelphistudy
AT ocallaghanmichaeledmund assessmentofclinicalinformationqualityindigitalhealthtechnologiesinternationaledelphistudy
AT zarynabil assessmentofclinicalinformationqualityindigitalhealthtechnologiesinternationaledelphistudy
AT hendersonnicola assessmentofclinicalinformationqualityindigitalhealthtechnologiesinternationaledelphistudy
AT chavannesnielsh assessmentofclinicalinformationqualityindigitalhealthtechnologiesinternationaledelphistudy
AT civljakrok assessmentofclinicalinformationqualityindigitalhealthtechnologiesinternationaledelphistudy
AT olubiyiolubunmiabiola assessmentofclinicalinformationqualityindigitalhealthtechnologiesinternationaledelphistudy
AT mahapatrapiyush assessmentofclinicalinformationqualityindigitalhealthtechnologiesinternationaledelphistudy
AT pandayrishinannan assessmentofclinicalinformationqualityindigitalhealthtechnologiesinternationaledelphistudy
AT orijisundayo assessmentofclinicalinformationqualityindigitalhealthtechnologiesinternationaledelphistudy
AT foxtatianaerlikh assessmentofclinicalinformationqualityindigitalhealthtechnologiesinternationaledelphistudy
AT faintvictoria assessmentofclinicalinformationqualityindigitalhealthtechnologiesinternationaledelphistudy
AT carjosip assessmentofclinicalinformationqualityindigitalhealthtechnologiesinternationaledelphistudy