Defining and conceptualising data harmonisation: a scoping review protocol

Schmidt, Bey‐Marrié; Hohlfeld, Ameer; Leon, Natalie

doi:10.1186/s13643-018-0890-7

Cited by 7 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This phase comprised the extraction of the appropriate data from the selected literature to compile important insights to answer the research question, as recommended [ 21 , 22 ]. The extraction of the appropriate data assisted in identifying the relevant variables for answering the primary review question.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stressors and Coping Strategies among Nursing Students during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Scoping Review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

COVID-19 has impacted every aspect of life around the world. Nursing education has moved classes online. Undoubtedly, the period has been stressful for nursing students. The scoping review aimed to explore the relevant evidence related to stressors and coping strategies among nursing students during the COVID-19 pandemic. The scoping review methodology was used to map the relevant evidence and synthesize the findings by framing the research question using PICOT, determining the keywords, eligibility criteria, searching the CINAHL, MEDLINE, and PubMed databases for the relevant studies. The review further involved study selection based on the PRISMA flow diagram, charting the data, collecting, and summarizing the findings. The critical analysis of findings from the 13 journal articles showed that the COVID-19 period has been stressful for nursing students with classes moving online. The nursing students feared the COVID-19 virus along with experiencing anxiety and stressful situations due to distance learning, clinical training, assignments, and educational workloads. Nursing students applied coping strategies of seeking information and consultation, staying optimistic, and transference. The pandemic affected the psychological health of learners as they adjusted to the new learning structure. Future studies should deliberate on mental issues and solutions facing nursing students during the COVID-19 pandemic.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stressors and Coping Strategies among Nursing Students during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Scoping Review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This review followed the standard steps for systematic reviews: identifying the research question, identifying relevant studies, selecting studies for inclusion, data extraction and data synthesis. These are detailed in our published study protocol [20].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We limited our search to the year 2000 as digital technology-based innovations began during this period (such as health information exchange) began in high-income countries (predominantly in the United States of America) and when researchers and health system managers in LMICs became interested in the integration of large digital databases [ 21 ]. We present the search strategy in the study protocol [ 20 ]. Based on preliminary searches we anticipated that these databases would yield the highest results.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Definitions, components and processes of data harmonisation in healthcare: a scoping review

Schmidt

Hohlfeld

Leon

2020

BMC Med Inform Decis Mak

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Data harmonisation (DH) has emerged amongst health managers, information technology specialists and researchers as an important intervention for routine health information systems (RHISs). It is important to understand what DH is, how it is defined and conceptualised, and how it can lead to better health management decision-making. This scoping review identifies a range of definitions for DH, its characteristics (in terms of key components and processes), and common explanations of the relationship between DH and health management decision-making. Methods This scoping review identified relevant studies from 2000 onwards (date filter), written in English and published in PubMed, Web of Science and CINAHL. Two reviewers independently screened records for potential inclusion for the abstract and full-text screening stages. One reviewer did the data extraction, analysis and synthesis, with built-in reliability checks from the rest of the team. We developed a narrative synthesis of definitions and explanations of the relationship between DH and health management decision-making. Results We sampled 61 of 181 included to synthesis definitions and concepts of DH in detail. We identified six common terms for data harmonisation: record linkage, data linkage, data warehousing, data sharing, data interoperability and health information exchange. We also identified nine key components of data harmonisation: DH involves (a) a process of multiple steps; (b) integrating, harmonising and bringing together different databases (c) two or more databases; (d) electronic data; (e) pooling data using unique patient identifiers; and (f) different types of data; (g) data found within and across different departments and institutions at facility, district, regional and national levels; (h) different types of technical activities; (i) has a specific scope. The relationship between DH and health management decision-making is not well-described in the literature. Several studies mentioned health providers’ concerns about data completeness, data quality, terminology and coding of data elements as barriers to data utilisation for clinical decision-making. Conclusion To our knowledge, this scoping review was the first to synthesise definitions and concepts of DH and address the causal relationship between DH and health management decision-making. Future research is required to assess the effectiveness of data harmonisation on health management decision-making.

show abstract

“…For instance, the search strategy for Switzerland on PubMed was: ("Administrative Claims, Healthcare"[Mesh] OR "Health Records, Personal"[Mesh] OR "Clinical Coding"[Mesh] OR "Patient Discharge Summaries"[Mesh] OR "Clinical Trials as Topic"[Mesh]) AND ("Databases as Topic"[Mesh] OR "Data Collection"[Mesh] OR "Medical Informatics"[Mesh] OR "Medical Record Linkage"[Mesh] OR "Information Dissemination"[Mesh] OR "Data Integration" OR "Data Sharing") AND ("Switzerland"[Mesh]) [filters used are Articles types (Clinical Study, Clinical Trials (including controlled and Phases I to IV), Comparative Study, Evaluation Studies, Journal Article, Multicenter Study, Observational Study, Pragmatic Clinical Trial, Randomized Control Trial, Technical Report and Validation Studies), language (Danish, English, French and German) and species (Human Studies)]. We did not include harmonization as an imperative component in our search strategy since the exact boundaries of this concept are still controversial [25] and the addition of the term “harmonization” as an imperative component drastically reduced the number of publications for each country.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors influencing harmonized health data collection, sharing and linkage in Denmark and Switzerland: A systematic review

Geneviève

Martani²,

Mallet³

et al. 2019

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionThe digitalization of medicine has led to a considerable growth of heterogeneous health datasets, which could improve healthcare research if integrated into the clinical life cycle. This process requires, amongst other things, the harmonization of these datasets, which is a prerequisite to improve their quality, re-usability and interoperability. However, there is a wide range of factors that either hinder or favor the harmonized collection, sharing and linkage of health data.ObjectiveThis systematic review aims to identify barriers and facilitators to health data harmonization—including data sharing and linkage—by a comparative analysis of studies from Denmark and Switzerland.MethodsPublications from PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE and CINAHL involving cross-institutional or cross-border collection, sharing or linkage of health data from Denmark or Switzerland were searched to identify the reported barriers and facilitators to data harmonization.ResultsOf the 345 projects included, 240 were single-country and 105 were multinational studies. Regarding national projects, a Swiss study reported on average more barriers and facilitators than a Danish study. Barriers and facilitators of a technical nature were most frequently reported.ConclusionThis systematic review gathered evidence from Denmark and Switzerland on barriers and facilitators concerning data harmonization, sharing and linkage. Barriers and facilitators were strictly interrelated with the national context where projects were carried out. Structural changes, such as legislation implemented at the national level, were mirrored in the projects. This underlines the impact of national strategies in the field of health data. Our findings also suggest that more openness and clarity in the reporting of both barriers and facilitators to data harmonization constitute a key element to promote the successful management of new projects using health data and the implementation of proper policies in this field. Our study findings are thus meaningful beyond these two countries.

show abstract

Defining and conceptualising data harmonisation: a scoping review protocol

Cited by 7 publications

References 13 publications

Stressors and Coping Strategies among Nursing Students during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Scoping Review

Stressors and Coping Strategies among Nursing Students during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Scoping Review

Definitions, components and processes of data harmonisation in healthcare: a scoping review

Factors influencing harmonized health data collection, sharing and linkage in Denmark and Switzerland: A systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About