1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      How can we monitor the impact of national health information systems? Results from a scoping review

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          National health information (HI) systems provide data on population health, the determinants of health and health system performance within countries. The evaluation of these systems has traditionally focused on statistical practices and procedures, and not on data use or reuse for policy and practice. This limits the capacity to assess the impact of HI systems on healthcare provision, management and policy-making. On the other hand, the field of Knowledge Translation (KT) has developed frameworks to guide evidence into practice.

          Methods

          A scoping review of the KT literature to identify the essential mechanisms and determinants of KT that could help monitor the impact of HI systems.

          Results

          We examined 79 publications and we identified over 100 different KT frameworks but none of these were focused on HI systems per se. There were specific recommendations on disseminating evidence to stakeholders at the institutional and organizational level, and on sustaining the use of evidence in practice and the broader community setting.

          Conclusions

          We developed a new model, the HI-Impact framework, in which four domains are essential for mapping the impact of national HI systems: (i) HI Evidence Quality, (ii) HI System Responsiveness, (iii) Stakeholder Engagement and (iv) Knowledge Integration. A comprehensive impact assessment of HI systems requires addressing the use of HI in public health decision-making, health service delivery and in other sectors which might have not been considered previously. Monitoring Stakeholder Engagement and Knowledge Integration certifies that the use of HI in all policies is an explicit point of assessment.

          Related collections

          Most cited references24

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          A systematic review of barriers to data sharing in public health

          Background In the current information age, the use of data has become essential for decision making in public health at the local, national, and global level. Despite a global commitment to the use and sharing of public health data, this can be challenging in reality. No systematic framework or global operational guidelines have been created for data sharing in public health. Barriers at different levels have limited data sharing but have only been anecdotally discussed or in the context of specific case studies. Incomplete systematic evidence on the scope and variety of these barriers has limited opportunities to maximize the value and use of public health data for science and policy. Methods We conducted a systematic literature review of potential barriers to public health data sharing. Documents that described barriers to sharing of routinely collected public health data were eligible for inclusion and reviewed independently by a team of experts. We grouped identified barriers in a taxonomy for a focused international dialogue on solutions. Results Twenty potential barriers were identified and classified in six categories: technical, motivational, economic, political, legal and ethical. The first three categories are deeply rooted in well-known challenges of health information systems for which structural solutions have yet to be found; the last three have solutions that lie in an international dialogue aimed at generating consensus on policies and instruments for data sharing. Conclusions The simultaneous effect of multiple interacting barriers ranging from technical to intangible issues has greatly complicated advances in public health data sharing. A systematic framework of barriers to data sharing in public health will be essential to accelerate the use of valuable information for the global good. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2458-14-1144) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Knowledge translation is the use of knowledge in health care decision making.

            To provide an overview of the science and practice of knowledge translation. Narrative review outlining what knowledge translation is and a framework for its use. Knowledge translation is defined as the use of knowledge in practice and decision making by the public, patients, health care professionals, managers, and policy makers. Failures to use research evidence to inform decision making are apparent across all these key decision maker groups. There are several proposed theories and frameworks for achieving knowledge translation. A conceptual framework developed by Graham et al., termed the knowledge-to-action cycle, provides an approach that builds on the commonalities found in an assessment of planned action theories. Review of the evidence base for the science and practice of knowledge translation has identified several gaps including the need to develop valid strategies for assessing the determinants of knowledge use and for evaluating sustainability of knowledge translation interventions. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Dissemination and implementation research on community-based cancer prevention: a systematic review.

              An extensive array of effective interventions for the prevention of cancer exists, suggesting that evidence is ready for widespread use. However, few of these approaches have been extensively utilized in real-world settings. Further, little is known on how to best disseminate and implement evidence-based interventions for the primary prevention of cancer in community settings. A systematic review of the dissemination and implementation literature was conducted between 2006 and 2008 in the topic areas of smoking, healthy diet, physical activity, and sun protection. English-language peer-reviewed articles published between 1980 and 2008 that met the inclusion criteria were classified by suitability of study design (i.e., greatest, moderate, least); quality of execution (i.e., good, fair, limited); and effectiveness (i.e., substantial, some, or little/no evidence of effectiveness) and were abstracted for dissemination- and implementation-related content. Twenty-five unique dissemination and implementation studies were identified. The majority of included studies were conducted in the U.S., in schools, and with children as the ultimate target population, had the least suitability of study design, had fair or limited execution, and used a theoretic framework, active dissemination and implementation approaches, and multimodal strategies. There was considerable heterogeneity across studies in reported mediators, moderators, and outcomes. Key implications from this review include the need for uniform language, studies targeting various populations and settings, valid and reliable measures, triangulation of and more practice-based evidence, standardized reporting criteria, and active and multimodal strategies. 2010 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Eur J Public Health
                Eur J Public Health
                eurpub
                The European Journal of Public Health
                Oxford University Press
                1101-1262
                1464-360X
                August 2020
                24 October 2019
                24 October 2019
                : 30
                : 4
                : 648-659
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Department of Epidemiology and public health , Sciensano, Brussels, Belgium
                [2 ] Department of Medical Sociology and Rehabilitation Science, Charité Berlin University of Medicine , Berlin, Germany
                [3 ] Department of Public Health, Amsterdam University Medical Centers , Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [4 ] Division of Health Informatics and Biostatistics, Croatian Institute of Public Health , Zagreb, Croatia
                [5 ] Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Ghent University , Ghent, Belgium
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Marie Delnord, Department of Epidemiology and public health, Sciensano, 14 Rue Juliette Wytsman, Brussels 1050, Belgium, Tel: +32 2 642 5741, e-mail: marie.delnord@ 123456sciensano.be
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3168-0219
                Article
                ckz164
                10.1093/eurpub/ckz164
                7445047
                31647526
                7b1cfdb0-38a6-40e3-8dbd-b2de5553452b
                © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Public Health Association.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                Page count
                Pages: 0000
                Funding
                Funded by: Marie Skłodowska-Curie Action Individual Fellowship;
                Award ID: GA No 795051
                Funded by: HealthPros, a Marie Skłodowska-Curie Innovative Training Network;
                Award ID: GA No 765141
                Categories
                Health Services Research
                AcademicSubjects/MED00860
                AcademicSubjects/SOC01210
                AcademicSubjects/SOC02610

                Public health
                Public health

                Comments

                Comment on this article