The Australian general public's perceptions of having a personally controlled electronic health record (PCEHR)

Andrews, Lynda; Gajanayake, Randike; Sahama, Tony

doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2014.08.002

Cited by 92 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Most notably, ePHRs users fear their health information falling into the hands of their employers (Lafky & Horan, 2011). It is recognized that the risk of malicious misappropriation of health data constitutes a major barrier for ePHR use (Andrews et al, 2014;Lafky & Horan, 2011). The deeply sensitive nature of personal health data and the associated privacy issues discourage the adoption of even the most functionally and technically perfect system (Dinev et al, 2016).…”

Section: Challenges To Ephrs' Implementationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Healthcare service innovation based on information technology : The role of social values alignment

Marsan¹,

Audebrand²,

Croteau³

et al. 2017

Systèmes d'Information &Amp; Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Le dossier de santé personnel informatisé (DSPI) est une technologie de l’information (TI) conçue pour l’autonomisation des patients en matière d’autogestion de la santé. Toutefois, son déploiement réel reste moindre que prévu en raison de deux barrières principales que doivent adresser les fournisseurs de DSPI : manque de confiance envers le fournisseur dans la confidentialité des données et manque de flexibilité de l’outil. Pour outrepasser ces barrières, nous envisageons la possibilité que les DSPI soient offerts par les coopératives de santé en collaboration avec la communauté de développement open source partageant des valeurs similaires. En mobilisant le concept d’alignement social qui met l’accent sur les valeurs, nous explorons d’abord la possibilité d’alignements sociaux entre les valeurs sous-jacentes à la mission des coopératives de santé et celles sous-jacentes à la finalité des DSPI, et entre les valeurs fondamentales des coopératives de santé et celles des communautés de développement open source. Nous explorons aussi l’effet de ces alignements potentiels sur l’intérêt des coopératives de santé à innover avec un service de santé basé sur le DSPI. Pour atteindre nos objectifs de recherche 17 entrevues ont été menées dans des coopératives de santé au Québec, une province du Canada où le réseau des coopératives de santé est particulièrement actif. Nos résultats montrent que le concept d’alignement des valeurs sociales est utile dans le contexte de l’innovation de service basé sur un DSPI dans les coopératives de santé. Toutefois, notre analyse des données montre que l’alignement des valeurs sociales ne suffit pas pour qu’une telle innovation se produise. En effet, nos résultats nous ont conduits vers le concept de prédisposition organisationnelle afin de mieux comprendre ce qui est nécessaire pour augmenter la probabilité que l’innovation de service basé sur un DSPI se produise au sein des coopératives de santé. Cette étude se termine par l’amorce d’un développement théorique où nous bâtissons sur nos résultats et sur la littérature pour proposer un modèle conceptuel de l’innovation de service basé sur les TI dans les organisations de soins de santé.

show abstract

Section: Challenges To Ephrs' Implementationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The first challenge is related to the patients' lack of trust in the ePHR provider itself. The risk of malicious misappropriation of health data stored in ePHRs constitutes a major barrier for patients (Andrews et al, 2014;Lafky & Horan, 2011). The second challenge refers to the lack of ePHRs' flexibility.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Healthcare service innovation based on information technology : The role of social values alignment

Marsan¹,

Audebrand²,

Croteau³

et al. 2017

Systèmes d'Information &Amp; Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Research conducted prior to the launch of the PCEHR established that the public as well as healthcare providers were uninformed about the impeding introduction of the PCEHR . Survey data collected from 405 Australian consumers ( n = 203) and healthcare providers ( n = 202) in November 2010 indicate that respondents believe that healthcare providers with access to the PCEHR would be able to provide better quality of care; therefore, it would be beneficial to have a PCEHR.…”

Section: Component Loadings Of the 17 Pcehr Attitude Items In The Primentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Research conducted prior to the launch of the PCEHR established that the public as well as healthcare providers were uninformed about the impeding introduction of the PCEHR. [7][8][9][10][11][12] Survey data collected from 405 Australian consumers (n = 203) and healthcare providers (n = 202) in November 2010 indicate that respondents believe that healthcare providers with access to the PCEHR would be able to provide better quality of care; therefore, it would be beneficial to have a PCEHR. However, respondents also believed it was important for individuals to remain in control over what information was uploaded to the PCEHR and who could access the PCEHR thereby potentially limiting healthcare providers' access to crucial information needed to provide better quality of care.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Positive beliefs and privacy concerns shape the future for the Personally Controlled Electronic Health Record

Lehnbom

Douglas

Makeham

2016

Internal Medicine Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The uptake of the Personally Controlled Electronic Health Record (PCEHR) has been slowly building momentum in Australia. The purpose of the PCEHR is to collect clinically important information from multiple healthcare providers to provide a secure electronic record to patients and their authorised healthcare providers that will ultimately enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of healthcare delivery. Reasons for the slow uptake of the PCEHR and future directions to improve its usefulness is discussed later.

show abstract

“…PCeHRs are targeted to both patients and healthcare workers for reading, writing, and sharing information [7]. They are becoming increasingly common and have been open, for example, in Australia since 2012.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scholarly Influence of the Conference and Labs of the Evaluation Forum eHealth Initiative: Review and Bibliometric Study of the 2012 to 2017 Outcomes (Preprint)

Suominen¹,

Kelly²,

Goeuriot³

2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The eHealth initiative of the Conference and Labs of the Evaluation Forum (CLEF) has aimed since 2012 to gather researchers working on health text analytics and to provide them with annual workshop, shared development challenges/tasks, benchmark datasets, and software for processing and evaluation. The overall purpose of this initiative is to ease and support patients, their next-ofkin, clinical staff, health scientists, and healthcare policy makers in accessing, understanding, using, and authoring health information in a multilingual setting. Objective: This original research paper reports on the outcomes of the first six installations of CLEF eHealth from 2012 to 2017. The focus is on measuring and analysing the scholarly influence by reviewing CLEF eHealth papers, together with relevant citation metrics. Methods: A review and bibliometric study of the CLEF eHealth proceedings, working notes, and author-declared paper extensions was conducted. Citation data for these publications were collected from Google Scholar. Citation content analysis was used for the publications and their citations. Results: The large number of registrations, submissions, and citations demonstrate the substantial community interest in the tasks and their resources. In total, 718 teams have registered their interest in the tasks, leading to 130 teams submitting to the 15 tasks. 184 papers using CLEF eHealth data generated 1,299 citations, yielding a total scholarly citation influence of almost 963,000 citations for the 741 co-authors and included authors from 33 countries across the world. The tasks' evaluation outcomes contribute to the knowledge of the difficulty of the research challenges the tasks address and the applicability of particular methods in solving these challenges, with typically statistically significant improvements in processing quality. Conclusions: These outcomes encourage continuing to develop these technologies to address patient needs. Consequently, data and tools have been opened for future research and development and the CLEF eHealth initiative continues to run new challenges. Keywords: Evaluation Studies as Topic; Health Records; Information Extraction; Information Storage and Retrieval; Information Visualization; Patient Education as Topic; Speech Recognition; Systematic Reviews; Test-set Generation; Text Classification IntroductionHealth information refers to all health-related content in all data formats, document types, information systems, publication media, and languages from all organisations, states, and countries. The privacy-sensitive, official part of health information consists of data recorded in healthcare services when describing a given patient's health or healthcare (Figure 1). The accessibility of this data is defined as limited (i.e., private or confidential information) and it is recorded either on paper in health records or electronically in Electronic Health (eHealth) records. Some common synonyms or related terms include eHealth charts, data, documents, information, ...

show abstract

The Australian general public's perceptions of having a personally controlled electronic health record (PCEHR)

Cited by 92 publications

References 27 publications

Healthcare service innovation based on information technology : The role of social values alignment

Healthcare service innovation based on information technology : The role of social values alignment

Positive beliefs and privacy concerns shape the future for the Personally Controlled Electronic Health Record

Scholarly Influence of the Conference and Labs of the Evaluation Forum eHealth Initiative: Review and Bibliometric Study of the 2012 to 2017 Outcomes (Preprint)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About