How digital health translational research is prioritised: a qualitative stakeholder-driven approach to decision support evaluation

被引:0
|
作者
Bamgboje-Ayodele, Adeola [1 ]
Mcphail, Steven M. [2 ]
Brain, David [2 ]
Taggart, Richard [3 ]
Burger, Mitchell [3 ]
Bruce, Lenert [4 ]
Holtby, Caroline [4 ]
Pradhan, Malcolm [5 ]
Simpson, Mark [6 ]
Shaw, Tim J. [1 ]
Baysari, Melissa T. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sydney, Sch Med Sci, Fac Med & Hlth, Biomed Informat & Digital Hlth, Camperdown, NSW, Australia
[2] Queensland Univ Technol, Australian Ctr Hlth Serv Innovat, Ctr Healthcare Transformat, Brisbane, Qld, Australia
[3] NSW Hlth, Sydney Local Hlth Dist, Camperdown, NSW, Australia
[4] NSW Hlth, Murrumbidgee Local Hlth Dist, Wagga Wagga, NSW, Australia
[5] Alcid Pty Inc, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[6] ehlth NSW, Chatswood, NSW, Australia
来源
BMJ OPEN | 2023年 / 13卷 / 11期
基金
澳大利亚国家健康与医学研究理事会;
关键词
Health informatics; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; Quality in health care;
D O I
10.1136/bmjopen-2023-075009
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
ObjectivesDigital health is now routinely being applied in clinical care, and with a variety of clinician-facing systems available, healthcare organisations are increasingly required to make decisions about technology implementation and evaluation. However, few studies have examined how digital health research is prioritised, particularly research focused on clinician-facing decision support systems. This study aimed to identify criteria for prioritising digital health research, examine how these differ from criteria for prioritising traditional health research and determine priority decision support use cases for a collaborative implementation research programme.MethodsDrawing on an interpretive listening model for priority setting and a stakeholder-driven approach, our prioritisation process involved stakeholder identification, eliciting decision support use case priorities from stakeholders, generating initial use case priorities and finalising preferred use cases based on consultations. In this qualitative study, online focus group session(s) were held with stakeholders, audiorecorded, transcribed and analysed thematically.ResultsFifteen participants attended the online priority setting sessions. Criteria for prioritising digital health research fell into three themes, namely: public health benefit, health system-level factors and research process and feasibility. We identified criteria unique to digital health research as the availability of suitable governance frameworks, candidate technology's alignment with other technologies in use,and the possibility of data-driven insights from health technology data. The final selected use cases were remote monitoring of patients with pulmonary conditions, sepsis detection and automated breast screening.ConclusionThe criteria for determining digital health research priority areas are more nuanced than that of traditional health condition focused research and can neither be viewed solely through a clinical lens nor technological lens. As digital health research relies heavily on health technology implementation, digital health prioritisation criteria comprised enablers of successful technology implementation. Our prioritisation process could be applied to other settings and collaborative projects where research institutions partner with healthcare delivery organisations.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] STAKEHOLDER-DRIVEN ONE HEALTH RESEARCH
    Miller, Woutrina
    Wuertz, Stefan
    Shapiro, Karen
    Schriewer, Alex
    Odagiri, Mitsunori
    [J]. JOURNAL OF SHELLFISH RESEARCH, 2012, 31 (01): : 324 - 324
  • [2] Design of decision support for stakeholder-driven collaborative land valuation
    O'Connell, IJ
    Keller, CP
    [J]. ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING B-PLANNING & DESIGN, 2002, 29 (04): : 607 - 628
  • [3] Information Technology and decision support tools for stakeholder-driven river basin salinity management
    Quinn, Nigel W. T.
    Cozad, Daniel B.
    Lee, Gene
    [J]. 43RD HAWAII INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SYSTEMS SCIENCES VOLS 1-5 (HICSS 2010), 2010, : 1025 - +
  • [4] Stakeholder-driven development of a decision support framework targeting sustainable water supply systems
    Rapp, Viktor La Torre
    Knutsson, Jesper
    Wallin, Jorgen
    [J]. ENERGY REPORTS, 2024, 12 : 2306 - 2320
  • [5] Design of a decision support tool for visualising E-coil risk on agricultural land using a stakeholder-driven approach
    Oliver, David M.
    Bartie, Phil J.
    Heathwaite, A. Louise
    Pschetz, Larissa
    Quilliam, Richard S.
    [J]. LAND USE POLICY, 2017, 66 : 227 - 234
  • [6] Governance in health workforce: how do we improve on the concept? A network-based, stakeholder-driven approach
    Lim, Max Ying Hao
    Lin, Vivian
    [J]. HUMAN RESOURCES FOR HEALTH, 2021, 19 (01)
  • [7] Governance in health workforce: how do we improve on the concept? A network-based, stakeholder-driven approach
    Max Ying Hao Lim
    Vivian Lin
    [J]. Human Resources for Health, 19
  • [8] A Decision-Making Platform for Educational Content Assessment Within a Stakeholder-Driven Digital Educational Ecosystem
    Nurbekova, Zhanat
    Aimicheva, Gaukhar
    Baigusheva, Kanagat
    Sembayev, Talgat
    Mukametkali, Manshuk
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING PEDAGOGY, 2023, 13 (07): : 4 - 23
  • [9] Toward criteria for pragmatic measurement in implementation research and practice: a stakeholder-driven approach using concept mapping
    Byron J. Powell
    Cameo F. Stanick
    Heather M. Halko
    Caitlin N. Dorsey
    Bryan J. Weiner
    Melanie A. Barwick
    Laura J. Damschroder
    Michel Wensing
    Luke Wolfenden
    Cara C. Lewis
    [J]. Implementation Science, 12
  • [10] Toward criteria for pragmatic measurement in implementation research and practice: a stakeholder-driven approach using concept mapping
    Powell, Byron J.
    Stanick, Cameo F.
    Halko, Heather M.
    Dorsey, Caitlin N.
    Weiner, Bryan J.
    Barwick, Melanie A.
    Damschroder, Laura J.
    Wensing, Michel
    Wolfenden, Luke
    Lewis, Cara C.
    [J]. IMPLEMENTATION SCIENCE, 2017, 12