Dataset Information

Human resource information systems in health care: a systematic evidence review.

ABSTRACT: Objective:This systematic review aimed to: (1) determine the prevalence and scope of existing research on human resource information systems (HRIS) in health organizations; (2) analyze, classify, and synthesize evidence on the processes and impacts of HRIS development, implementation, and adoption; and (3) generate recommendations for HRIS research, practice, and policy, with reference to the needs of different stakeholders. Methods:A structured search strategy was used to interrogate 10 electronic databases indexing research from the health, social, management, technology, and interdisciplinary sciences, alongside gray literature sources and reference lists of qualifying studies. There were no restrictions on language or publication year. Two reviewers screened publications, extracted data, and coded findings according to the innovation stages covered in the studies. The Critical Appraisal Skills Program checklist was adopted to assess study quality. The process of study selection was charted using a Preferred Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) diagram. Results:Of the 6824 publications identified by the search strategy, 68, covering 42 studies, were included for final analysis. Research on HRIS in health was interdisciplinary, often atheoretical, conducted primarily in the hospital sector of high-income economies, and largely focused uncritically on use and realized benefits. Discussion and Conclusions:While studies of HRIS in health exist, the overall lack of evaluative research raises unanswered questions about their capacity to improve quality and efficiency and enable learning health systems, as well as how sociotechnical complexity influences implementation and effectiveness. We offer this analysis to decision makers and managers considering or currently implementing an HRIS, and make recommendations for further research. Trial Registration:International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO): CRD42015023581. http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.asp?ID=CRD42015023581#.VYu1BPlVjDU .

SUBMITTER: Tursunbayeva A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5391731 | biostudies-literature | 2017 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Human resource information systems in health care: a systematic evidence review.

Tursunbayeva Aizhan A Bunduchi Raluca R Franco Massimo M Pagliari Claudia C

Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA 20170501 3

<h4>Objective</h4>This systematic review aimed to: (1) determine the prevalence and scope of existing research on human resource information systems (HRIS) in health organizations; (2) analyze, classify, and synthesize evidence on the processes and impacts of HRIS development, implementation, and adoption; and (3) generate recommendations for HRIS research, practice, and policy, with reference to the needs of different stakeholders.<h4>Methods</h4>A structured search strategy was used to interro ...[more]

PMID: 27707821

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPatient-centered health care information systems (PHSs) enable patients to take control and become knowledgeable about their own health, preferably in a secure environment. Current and emerging PHSs use either a centralized database, peer-to-peer (P2P) technology, or distributed ledger technology for PHS deployment. The evolving COVID-19 decentralized Bluetooth-based tracing systems are examples of disease-centric P2P PHSs. Although using P2P technology for the provision of PHSs can be flexible, scalable, resilient to a single point of failure, and inexpensive for patients, the use of health information on P2P networks poses major security issues as users must manage information security largely by themselves.ObjectiveThis study aims to identify the inherent security issues for PHS deployment in P2P networks and how they can be overcome. In addition, this study reviews different P2P architectures and proposes a suitable architecture for P2P PHS deployment.MethodsA systematic literature review was conducted following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) reporting guidelines. Thematic analysis was used for data analysis. We searched the following databases: IEEE Digital Library, PubMed, Science Direct, ACM Digital Library, Scopus, and Semantic Scholar. The search was conducted on articles published between 2008 and 2020. The Common Vulnerability Scoring System was used as a guide for rating security issues.ResultsOur findings are consolidated into 8 key security issues associated with PHS implementation and deployment on P2P networks and 7 factors promoting them. Moreover, we propose a suitable architecture for P2P PHSs and guidelines for the provision of PHSs while maintaining information security.ConclusionsDespite the clear advantages of P2P PHSs, the absence of centralized controls and inconsistent views of the network on some P2P systems have profound adverse impacts in terms of security. The security issues identified in this study need to be addressed to increase patients' intention to use PHSs on P2P networks by making them safe to use.

Project description:BACKGROUND:User-friendly information at the point of care should be well structured, rapidly accessible, and comprehensive. Also, this information should be trustworthy, as it will be used by health care practitioners to practice evidence-based medicine. Therefore, a standard, validated tool to evaluate the trustworthiness of such point-of-care information resources is needed. OBJECTIVE:This systematic review sought to search for tools to assess the trustworthiness of point-of-care resources and to describe and analyze the content of these tools. METHODS:A systematic search was performed on three sources: (1) we searched online for initiatives that worked off of the trustworthiness of medical information; (2) we searched Medline (PubMed) until June 2019 for relevant literature; and (3) we scanned reference lists and lists of citing papers via Web of Science for each retrieved paper. We included all studies, reports, websites, or methodologies that reported on tools that assessed the trustworthiness of medical information for professionals. From the selected studies, we extracted information on the general characteristics of the tools. As no standard, risk-of-bias assessment instruments are available for these types of studies, we described how each tool was developed, including any assessments on reliability and validity. We analyzed the criteria used in the different tools and divided them into five categories: (1) author-related information; (2) evidence-based methodology; (3) website quality; (4) website design and usability; and (5) website interactivity. The percentage of tools in compliance with these categories and the different criteria were calculated. RESULTS:Included in this review was a total of 17 tools, all published between 1997 and 2018. The tools were developed for different purposes, from a general quality assessment of medical information to very detailed analyses, all specifically for point-of-care resources. However, the development process of the tools was poorly described. Overall, seven tools had a scoring system implemented, two were assessed for reliability only, and two other tools were assessed for both validity and reliability. The content analysis showed that all the tools assessed criteria related to an evidence-based methodology: 82% of the tools assessed author-related information, 71% assessed criteria related to website quality, 71% assessed criteria related to website design and usability, and 47% of the tools assessed criteria related to website interactivity. There was significant variability in criteria used, as some were very detailed while others were more broadly defined. CONCLUSIONS:The 17 included tools encompass a variety of items important for the assessment of the trustworthiness of point-of-care information. Overall, two tools were assessed for both reliability and validity, but they lacked some essential criteria for the assessment of the trustworthiness of medical information for use at the point-of-care. Currently, a standard, validated tool does not exist. The results of this review may contribute to the development of such an instrument, which may enhance the quality of point-of-care information in the long term. TRIAL REGISTRATION:PROSPERO CRD42019122565; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=122565.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough attainment of the health-related Millennium Development Goals relies on countries having adequate numbers of human resources for health (HRH) and their appropriate distribution, global understanding of the systems used to generate information for monitoring HRH stock and flows, known as human resources information systems (HRIS), is minimal. While HRIS are increasingly recognized as integral to health system performance assessment, baseline information regarding their scope and capability around the world has been limited. We conducted a review of the available literature on HRIS implementation processes in order to draw this baseline.MethodsOur systematic search initially retrieved 11 923 articles in four languages published in peer-reviewed and grey literature. Following the selection of those articles which detailed HRIS implementation processes, reviews of their contents were conducted using two-person teams, each assigned to a national system. A data abstraction tool was developed and used to facilitate objective assessment.ResultsNinety-five articles with relevant HRIS information were reviewed, mostly from the grey literature, which comprised 84?% of all documents. The articles represented 63 national HRIS and two regionally integrated systems. Whereas a high percentage of countries reported the capability to generate workforce supply and deployment data, few systems were documented as being used for HRH planning and decision-making. Of the systems examined, only 23?% explicitly stated they collect data on workforce attrition. The majority of countries experiencing crisis levels of HRH shortages (56?%) did not report data on health worker qualifications or professional credentialing as part of their HRIS.ConclusionAlthough HRIS are critical for evidence-based human resource policy and practice, there is a dearth of information about these systems, including their current capabilities. The absence of standardized HRIS profiles (including documented processes for data collection, management, and use) limits understanding of the availability and quality of information that can be used to support effective and efficient HRH strategies and investments at the national, regional, and global levels.

Project description:BackgroundExisting research postulates a variety of components that show an impact on utilization of technology-mediated mental health information systems (MHIS) and treatment outcome. Although researchers assessed the effect of isolated design elements on the results of Web-based interventions and the associations between symptom reduction and use of components across computer and mobile phone platforms, there remains uncertainty with regard to which components of technology-mediated interventions for mental health exert the greatest therapeutic gain. Until now, no studies have presented results on the therapeutic benefit associated with specific service components of technology-mediated MHIS for depression.ObjectiveThis systematic review aims at identifying components of technology-mediated MHIS for patients with depression. Consequently, all randomized controlled trials comparing technology-mediated treatments for depression to either waiting-list control, treatment as usual, or any other form of treatment for depression were reviewed. Updating prior reviews, this study aims to (1) assess the effectiveness of technology-supported interventions for the treatment of depression and (2) add to the debate on what components in technology-mediated MHIS for the treatment of depression should be standard of care.MethodsSystematic searches in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library were conducted. Effect sizes for each comparison between a technology-enabled intervention and a control condition were computed using the standard mean difference (SMD). Chi-square tests were used to test for heterogeneity. Using subgroup analysis, potential sources of heterogeneity were analyzed. Publication bias was examined using visual inspection of funnel plots and Begg's test. Qualitative data analysis was also used. In an explorative approach, a list of relevant components was extracted from the body of literature by consensus between two researchers.ResultsOf 6387 studies initially identified, 45 met all inclusion criteria. Programs analyzed showed a significant trend toward reduced depressive symptoms (SMD -0.58, 95% CI -0.71 to -0.45, P<.001). Heterogeneity was large (I2≥76). A total of 15 components were identified.ConclusionsTechnology-mediated MHIS for the treatment of depression has a consistent positive overall effect compared to controls. A total of 15 components have been identified. Further studies are needed to quantify the impact of individual components on treatment effects and to identify further components that are relevant for the design of future technology-mediated interventions for the treatment of depression and other mental disorders.

Dataset Information

Human resource information systems in health care: a systematic evidence review.

Publications

Human resource information systems in health care: a systematic evidence review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets