Problem in Patient Information System Acquirement in Finland: Translation and Terminology

Rantanen, Minna M.; Heimo, Olli I.

doi:10.1007/978-3-662-44208-1_29

Cited by 3 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The problem is same for the whole area of healthcare information system research we do not have common definition for acronyms that are used in research [5,6,1]. In other words, it seems that field do not have common understanding about the terms.…”

Section: Different Terms and Various Meaningsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This also creates a problem of comparability, since without knowing the implicit interpretation about PHR that different authors have, we cannot compare the results [1,48]. For example, if one author claims that PHRs have been beneficial in certain situation and other claims opposite and both have neglected defining the PHR, can we trust that they are talking about same kind of PHR?…”

Section: Problems and Challengesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The same statement applies to all terms in field of health related informatics 1 . The need for clearing the terminology of health informatics and health information technology is pointed out by several authors [2].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Rantanen and Heimo [1] state in their article about definition of term patient information system (PIS): "To have a discussion with one another we require a common set of terms understood by everyone. To develop complex multidisciplinary information systems we need a possibility for discussion.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

PHR, We’ve Had a Problem Here

Rantanen

Koskinen

2018

This Changes Everything – ICT and Climate Change: What Can We Do?

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Personal health records (PHRs) have been a global trend in recent decade. It has been seen as a concept and tool that could help patients maintaining health, improving their well-being, and supporting communication with healthcare professional etc. Despite the great amount of research about PHR there is no consensus what a PHR actually means in academic literature or other arenas. There are multiple terms in use and multiple definitions which set challenges for rational discourse between citizens/patient, healthcare providers, system developers and policy makers. Especially, when citizensas key stakeholdershould also be able to understand what those systems are we need clear and understandable definition for PHR's. In the paper, we conduct a brief survey for different definitions and show the problems that arise with the incoherent use of the term "PHR".

show abstract

Section: Different Terms and Various Meaningsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Problems and Challengesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

PHR, We’ve Had a Problem Here

Rantanen

Koskinen

2018

This Changes Everything – ICT and Climate Change: What Can We Do?

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Currently, variable names exist for records that contain information about patients such as: electronic health records (EHRs), electronic medical records (EMRs), electronic patient records (EPRs), personal health records (PHRs), healthcare information systems (HISs), etc. (Tang et al , 2006; Hayrinen et al , 2008; Rantanen and Heimo, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The concept of Datenherrschaft of patient information from a Heideggerian perspective

Koskinen

2019

JICES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose In this paper, patient information is approached from a Heideggerian perspective with the intention to gather an understanding about the personal nature of the information. The purpose of this paper is to analyse the ownership of patient information and then present Datenherrschaft (German for “mastery over information”) as a suitable model for patient ownership of patient information. Design/methodology/approach This paper is theoretical in approach. It is based on arguments derived from Heidegger’s work in the Being and Time. Findings Based on this Heideggerian approcah, a proposal for using the special definition of ownership of patient information – Datenherrschaft – given to a patient is suggested. From a Heideggerian perspective, it can be stated that the patient has the strongest rights towards patient information because this information is crucial for a patient to have an understanding about their Dasein (being-in-the-world). Research limitations/implications Datenherrschaft is used as an example of an ethically justified way of regulating the patient information ownership and should be analysed further. Especially the practical implications of implementing Datenherrschaft need more research. Originality/value Patient information ownership is an issue that is neither unambiguously solved in many countries, nor has it, in our view, been ethically justified. The potential solution – Datenherrschaft – presented in this paper is clear and has strong philosophical justifications.

show abstract