rss
J Am Med Inform Assoc 2007;14:368-371 doi:10.1197/jamia.M2276
  • Perspectives on Informatics
  • Viewpoint Paper

A Viewpoint on Evidence-based Health Informatics, Based on a Pilot Survey on Evaluation Studies in Health Care Informatics

  1. Elske Ammenwerth,
  2. Nicolette de Keizer
  1. Affiliations of the authors: Institute for Health Information Systems (EA), UMIT—University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Hall in Tyrol, Austria; Department of Medical Informatics (NdK), Academic Medical Center, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  1. Correspondence and reprints: Dr. Elske Ammenwerth, Institute for Health Information Systems, UMIT—University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Hall in Tyrol, Austria; email: <Elske.Ammenwerth{at}umit.at>
  • Received 14 September 2006
  • Accepted 26 January 2007

Abstract

Concerned about evidence-based health informatics, the authors conducted a limited pilot survey attempting to determine how many IT evaluation studies in health care are never published, and why. A survey distributed to 722 academics had a low response rate, with 136 respondents giving instructive comments on 217 evaluation studies. Of those studies, half were published in international journals, and more than one-third were never published. Reasons for not publishing (with multiple reasons per study possible) included: “results not of interest for others” (1/3 of all studies), “publication in preparation” (1/3), “no time for publication” (1/5), “limited scientific quality of study” (1/6), “political or legal reasons” (1/7), and “study only conducted for internal use” (1/8). Those reasons for non-publication in health informatics resembled those reported in other fields. Publication bias (preference for positive studies) did not appear to be a major issue. The authors believe that widespread application of guidelines in conducting health informatics evaluation studies and utilization of a registry for evaluation study results could improve the evidence base of the field.

Footnotes

  • Parts of the results have been presented at an MIE 2006 workshop and at a AMIA 2006 workshop.We thank all respondents for answering and providing valuable information and comments in this survey.

Access policy for JAMIA

All content published in JAMIA is deposited with PubMed Central by the publisher with a 12 month embargo. Authors/funders may pay an Unlocked fee of $2,000 to make the article free on the JAMIA website and PMC immediately on publication.

All content older than 12 months is freely available on this website.

AMIA members can log in with their JAMIA user name (email address) and password or via the AMIA website.