Dataset Information

Design and validity of a questionnaire to assess national eHealth architecture (NEHA): a study protocol.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

eHealth is critically important to build strong health systems, and accelerate the achievement of sustainable development goals, particularly universal health coverage. To support and strengthen the health system, the eHealth architecture needs to be formulated and established prior to the implementation and development of any national eHealth applications and services. The aim of this study is to design and validate a standard questionnaire to assess the current status of national eHealth architecture (NEHA) components.

Methods and analysis

This study will use a mixed-methods design consisting of four phases: (1) item generation through review of evidences and experts' opinions, (2) face and content validity of the questionnaire, (3) determination of a range of possible scenarios for each item included in the questionnaire and (4) evaluation of reliability. This questionnaire is expected to generate critical and important information about the status of NEHA components that will be useful for monitoring, formulating, developing, implementing and evaluating NEHA. Our paper will contribute, we envisage, to establishment of a socio-technical basis on which governments and other relevant sectors can compare the policy interventions that boost the availability and utilisation of eHealth services within their settings.

Ethics and dissemination

The Ethics Committee for Research at the Tehran University of Medical Sciences approved the study protocol. We will obtain informed consent from each participant and collect data anonymously to maintain confidentiality. The translation of the findings into future policy planning will include the production of a series of peer-reviewed articles, presentation of the findings at relevant eHealth conferences and preparation of policy reports to the international organisations aiming to strengthen national capacity for better-informed eHealth architecture.

SUBMITTER: Mousavi SM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6318539 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Design and validity of a questionnaire to assess national eHealth architecture (NEHA): a study protocol.

Mousavi Seyyed Meysam SM Takian Amirhossein A Tara Mahmood M

BMJ open 20181222 12

<h4>Introduction</h4>eHealth is critically important to build strong health systems, and accelerate the achievement of sustainable development goals, particularly universal health coverage. To support and strengthen the health system, the eHealth architecture needs to be formulated and established prior to the implementation and development of any national eHealth applications and services. The aim of this study is to design and validate a standard questionnaire to assess the current status of n ...[more]

PMID: 30580265

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) become quickly outdated and require a periodic reassessment of evidence research to maintain their validity. However, there is little research about this topic. Our project will provide evidence for some of the most pressing questions in this field: 1) what is the average time for recommendations to become out of date?; 2) what is the comparative performance of two restricted search strategies to evaluate the need to update recommendations?; and 3) what is the feasibility of a more regular monitoring and updating strategy compared to usual practice?. In this protocol we will focus on questions one and two. METHODS: The CPG Development Programme of the Spanish Ministry of Health developed 14 CPGs between 2008 and 2009. We will stratify guidelines by topic and by publication year, and include one CPG by strata.We will develop a strategy to assess the validity of CPG recommendations, which includes a baseline survey of clinical experts, an update of the original exhaustive literature searches, the identification of key references (reference that trigger a potential recommendation update), and the assessment of the potential changes in each recommendation.We will run two alternative search strategies to efficiently identify important new evidence: 1) PLUS search based in McMaster Premium LiteratUre Service (PLUS) database; and 2) a Restrictive Search (ReSe) based on the least number of MeSH terms and free text words needed to locate all the references of each original recommendation.We will perform a survival analysis of recommendations using the Kaplan-Meier method and we will use the log-rank test to analyse differences between survival curves according to the topic, the purpose, the strength of recommendations and the turnover. We will retrieve key references from the exhaustive search and evaluate their presence in the PLUS and ReSe search results. DISCUSSION: Our project, using a highly structured and transparent methodology, will provide guidance of when recommendations are likely to be at risk of being out of date. We will also assess two novel restrictive search strategies which could reduce the workload without compromising rigour when CPGs developers check for the need of updating.

Project description:BACKGROUND:For people to be able to access, understand, and benefit from the increasing digitalization of health services, it is critical that services are provided in a way that meets the user's needs, resources, and competence. OBJECTIVE:The objective of the study was to develop a questionnaire that captures the 7-dimensional eHealth Literacy Framework (eHLF). METHODS:Draft items were created in parallel in English and Danish. The items were generated from 450 statements collected during the conceptual development of eHLF. In all, 57 items (7 to 9 items per scale) were generated and adjusted after cognitive testing. Items were tested in 475 people recruited from settings in which the scale was intended to be used (community and health care settings) and including people with a range of chronic conditions. Measurement properties were assessed using approaches from item response theory (IRT) and classical test theory (CTT) such as confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and reliability using composite scale reliability (CSR); potential bias due to age and sex was evaluated using differential item functioning (DIF). RESULTS:CFA confirmed the presence of the 7 a priori dimensions of eHLF. Following item analysis, a 35-item 7-scale questionnaire was constructed, covering (1) using technology to process health information (5 items, CSR=.84), (2) understanding of health concepts and language (5 items, CSR=.75), (3) ability to actively engage with digital services (5 items, CSR=.86), (4) feel safe and in control (5 items, CSR=.87), (5) motivated to engage with digital services (5 items, CSR=.84), (6) access to digital services that work (6 items, CSR=.77), and (7) digital services that suit individual needs (4 items, CSR=.85). A 7-factor CFA model, using small-variance priors for cross-loadings and residual correlations, had a satisfactory fit (posterior productive P value: .27, 95% CI for the difference between the observed and replicated chi-square values: -63.7 to 133.8). The CFA showed that all items loaded strongly on their respective factors. The IRT analysis showed that no items were found to have disordered thresholds. For most scales, discriminant validity was acceptable; however, 2 pairs of dimensions were highly correlated; dimensions 1 and 5 (r=.95), and dimensions 6 and 7 (r=.96). All dimensions were retained because of strong content differentiation and potential causal relationships between these dimensions. There is no evidence of DIF. CONCLUSIONS:The eHealth Literacy Questionnaire (eHLQ) is a multidimensional tool based on a well-defined a priori eHLF framework with robust properties. It has satisfactory evidence of construct validity and reliable measurement across a broad range of concepts (using both CTT and IRT traditions) in various groups. It is designed to be used to understand and evaluate people's interaction with digital health services.

Project description:BackgroundAs health resources and services are increasingly delivered through digital platforms, eHealth literacy is becoming a set of essential capabilities to improve consumer health in the digital era. To understand eHealth literacy needs, a meaningful measure is required. Strong initial evidence for the reliability and construct validity of inferences drawn from the eHealth Literacy Questionnaire (eHLQ) was obtained during its development in Denmark, but validity testing for varying purposes is an ongoing and cumulative process.ObjectiveThis study aims to examine validity evidence based on relations to other variables-using data collected with the known-groups approach-to further explore if the eHLQ is a robust tool to understand eHealth literacy needs in different contexts. A priori hypotheses are set for the expected score differences among age, sex, education, and information and communication technology (ICT) use for each of the 7 eHealth literacy constructs represented by the 7 eHLQ scales.MethodsA Bayesian mediated multiple indicators multiple causes model approach was used to simultaneously identify group differences and test measurement invariance through differential item functioning across the groups, with ICT use as a mediator. A sample size of 500 participants was estimated. Data were collected at 3 diverse health sites in Australia.ResultsResponses from 525 participants were included for analysis. Being older was significantly related to lower scores in 4 eHLQ scales, with 3. Ability to actively engage with digital services having the strongest effect (total effect -0.37; P<.001), followed by 1. Using technology to process health information (total effect -0.32; P<.001), 5. Motivated to engage with digital services (total effect -0.21; P=.01), and 7. Digital services that suit individual needs (total effect -0.21; P=.02). However, the effects were only partially mediated by ICT use. Higher education was associated with higher scores in 1. Using technology to process health information (total effect 0.22; P=.01) and 3. Ability to actively engage with digital services (total effect 0.25; P<.001), with the effects mostly mediated by ICT use. Higher ICT use was related to higher scores in all scales except 2. Understanding health concepts and language and 4. Feel safe and in control. Either no or ignorable cases of differential item functioning were found across the 4 groups.ConclusionsBy using a Bayesian mediated multiple indicators multiple causes model, this study provides supportive validity evidence for the eHLQ based on relations to other variables as well as established evidence regarding internal structure related to measurement invariance across the groups for the 7 scales in the Australian community health context. This study also demonstrates that the eHLQ can be used to gain valuable insights into people's eHealth literacy needs to help optimize access and use of digital health and promote health equity.

Project description:ObjectivesPatient experience questionnaires have been criticised owing to the lack of supporting psychometric evidence. The objective of this study was to describe the development and psychometric evaluation of the Cancer Patient Experiences Questionnaire (CPEQ) in Norway.DesignQuestionnaire development was based on a literature review of existing questionnaires, patient interviews, expert-group consultations, pretesting of questionnaire items and a national survey. Psychometric evaluation included exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, and tests of internal consistency reliability and test-retest reliability.SettingData were collected using a postal survey of cancer patients attending 54 hospitals in all 4 health regions. The subjects were 14 227 adult cancer patients who had attended an outpatient clinic or who had been discharged from an inpatient ward. Patients with all types of cancer were included. Data quality, internal consistency reliability and construct validity were assessed.ResultsOf the 13 846 patients who received the CPEQ, 7212 (52%) responded. Exploratory factor analysis identified six scales of outpatient experiences relating to nurse contact, doctor contact, information, organisation, patient safety and contact with next of kin, and seven scales of inpatient experiences, with the addition of hospital standard to the aforementioned scales. All but two of the scales met the criterion of 0.70 for Cronbach's ? testing, and test-retest correlations ranged from 0.57 to 0.85. Confirmatory factor analysis supported the interpretation of six and seven scales for outpatients and inpatients, respectively. Statistically significant associations based on explicit hypotheses provided evidence for the construct validity of the scales. One additional scale measuring the hospital level was identified (?=0.85).ConclusionsThe CPEQ is a self-report instrument that includes the most important aspects of patient experiences with cancer care at hospitals. The instrument was tested following a national survey in Norway; good evidence is provided herein for the internal consistency reliability, test-retest reliability and construct validity.

Dataset Information

Design and validity of a questionnaire to assess national eHealth architecture (NEHA): a study protocol.

Introduction

Methods and analysis

Ethics and dissemination

Publications

Design and validity of a questionnaire to assess national eHealth architecture (NEHA): a study protocol.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure