Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Determining What to Study 48

  • Chapter
Evaluation Methods in Biomedical Informatics

Part of the book series: Health Informatics ((HI))

  • 4571 Accesses

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Eccles M, McColl E, Steen N, Rousseau N, Grimshaw J, Parkin D, Purves I. Effect of computerized evidence based guidelines on management of asthma and angina in adults in primary care: cluster randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2002 Oct 26;325(7370):941–948.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Murray MD, Harris LE, Overhage JM, Zhou XH, Eckert GJ, Smith FE, Buchanan NN, Wolinsky FD, McDonald CJ, Tierney WM. Failure of computerized treatment suggestions to improve health outcomes of outpatients with uncomplicated hypertension: results of a randomized controlled trial. Pharmacotherapy 2004 Mar;24(3):324–337.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Heathfield HA, Wyatt J. Philosophies for the design and development of clinical decision-support systems. Methods Inf Med 1993;32:1–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Wyatt JC. Clinical data systems, Part III: Developing and evaluating clinical data systems. Lancet 1994;344:1682–1688.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Smith MF. Prototypically topical: software prototyping and delivery of health care information systems. Br J Health Care Comput 1993;10(6):25–27.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Smith MF. Software Prototyping. London: McGraw-Hill, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Sommerville I. Software Engineering. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Fox J. Decision support systems as safety-critical components: towards a safety culture for medical informatics. Methods Inf Med 1993;32:345–348.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Staggers N, Kobus D. Comparing response time, errors, and satisfaction between text-based and graphical user interfaces during nursing order tasks. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2000 Mar-Apr;7(2):164–176.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Demiris G, Speedie S, Finkelstein S. A questionnaire for the assessment of patients’ impressions of the risks and benefits of home telecare. J Telemed Telecare 2000;6(5):278–84.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Nielsen J. Card sorting. Available at: http://www.useit.com. Accessed, June 24, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Nielsen J, Landauer TK. A mathematical model of the finding of usability problems. In: Proceedings of the ACM INTERCHI’93 Conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 24-29 April 1993. 206–213.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Wellwood J, Spiegelhalter DJ, Johannessen S. How does computer-aided diagnosis improve the management of acute abdominal pain? Ann R Col Surg Engl 1992;74:140–146.

    Google Scholar 

  14. de Dombal FT, Leaper DJ, Horrocks JC, et al. Human and computer-aided diagnosis of acute abdominal pain: further report with emphasis on performance of clinicians. BMJ 1974;1:376–380.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Mant J, Hicks N. Detecting differences in quality of care: the sensitivity of measures of process and outcome in treating acute myocardial infarction. BMJ 1995;311:793–796.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Spiegelhalter DJ. Evaluation of medical decision-aids, with an application to a system for dyspepsia. Stat Med 1983;2:207–216.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Gaschnig J, Klahr P, Pople H, Shortliffe E, Terry A. Evaluation of expert systems: issues and case studies. In: Hayes-Roth F, Waterman DA, Lenat D, eds. Building Expert Systems. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley; 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Wasson JH, Sox HC, Neff RK, Goldman L. Clinical prediction rules: applications and methodological standards. N Engl J Med 1985;313:793–799.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Lundsgaarde HP. Evaluating medical expert systems. Soc Sci Med 1987;24: 805–819.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Miller PL. Evaluating medical expert systems. In: Miller PL, ed. Selected Topics in Medical AI. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Nykanen P, ed. Issues in the Evaluation of Computer-Based Support to Clinical Decision Making. Report of SYDPOL WG5. Denmark: SYDPOL; 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Wyatt J, Spiegelhalter D. Evaluating medical expert systems: what to test and how? Med Inf (Lond) 1990;15:205–217.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Szczepura A, Kankaanpaa J. Assessment of Health Care Technologies. London: Wiley; 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  24. van Gennip EM, Talmon JL, eds. Assessment and Evaluation of Information Technologies in Medicine. Amsterdam: IOS Press; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Anderson JG, Aydin CE, Jay SJ, eds. Evaluating Health Care Information Systems. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  26. McNair P, Brender J. Methodological and methodical perils and pitfalls within assessment studies performed on IT-based solutions in healthcare. Aalborg University, Aalborg Virtual Centre for Health Informatics; 2003. Technical report No. 03-1.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Perry A, Capewell S, Walker A, Chalmers J, Redpath A, Major K, Morrison CE, Craig N, Cobbe S, Smith WC. Measuring the costs and benefits of heart disease monitoring. Heart. 2000 Jun;83(6):651–656.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Stead W, Haynes RB, Fuller S, et al. Designing medical informatics research and library projects to increase what is learned. J Am Med Inform Assoc 1994;1:28–34.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Haynes R, McKibbon K, Walker C, Ryan N, Fitzgerald D, Ramsden M. Online access to MEDLINE in a clinical setting. Ann Intern Med 1990;112:78–84.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Lindberg DA, Siegel ER, Rapp BA, Wallingford KT, Wilson SR. Use of MEDLINE by physicians for clinical problem solving. JAMA 1993;269: 3124–3129.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Gary A, Adhikan N, McDonald H, et al. Effect of computerized clinical decision support systems on practitioner performance and patient outcomes. A systematic review. JAMA 2005;293:1223–1238.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Community Health Sciences Faculty of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4N1, Canada

    Kathryn J. Hannah PhD, RN (Adjunct Professor) (Adjunct Professor)

  2. Clinical Informatics Strategies Healthlink, Inc., Baltimore, MD, 21210

    Marion J. Ball EdD (Vice President) (Vice President)

  3. The Johns Hopkins University School of Nursing, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA

    Marion J. Ball EdD (Vice President) (Vice President)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Springer Science+Business Media, Inc.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

(2006). Determining What to Study 48. In: Hannah, K.J., Ball, M.J. (eds) Evaluation Methods in Biomedical Informatics. Health Informatics. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-30677-3_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-30677-3_3

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-387-25889-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-387-30677-3

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation