DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-00413-1_2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An Evaluation Framework for EU Research and Development e-Health Projects’ Systems

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 2 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Mavridis et al [13] define a framework to evaluate the quality of the systems resulting from R&D projects in e-health based on three levels: i) system architecture, determines the degree to which an architecture satisfies quality objectives; ii) system software, uses the ISO/IEC 14598 standard [14] that indicates how, when, who, and what should be measured, as well as the ISO/IEC 9126 -2 & 3 standards [15] to measure the internal and external quality, and, iii) system prototype, applies the ISO/IEC 9126 -4 standard [15] that provides characteristics and metrics of quality in use to evaluate the prototypes used by end users in real scenarios. A limitation of this work is that the ISO/IEC 9126 standard used has been replaced by ISO/IEC 25010.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Mavridis et al [13] define a framework to evaluate the quality of the systems resulting from R&D projects in e-health based on three levels: i) system architecture, determines the degree to which an architecture satisfies quality objectives; ii) system software, uses the ISO/IEC 14598 standard [14] that indicates how, when, who, and what should be measured, as well as the ISO/IEC 9126 -2 & 3 standards [15] to measure the internal and external quality, and, iii) system prototype, applies the ISO/IEC 9126 -4 standard [15] that provides characteristics and metrics of quality in use to evaluate the prototypes used by end users in real scenarios. A limitation of this work is that the ISO/IEC 9126 standard used has been replaced by ISO/IEC 25010.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%