Implementing health information systems to support integrated care delivery: Learning from international challenges.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction: In recent years, governments from several countries have shown interest in integrated health information systems to support the delivery of integrated care. The interRAI suite of standardized, evidence-based assessments, validated across different care settings, was expressly designed for this purpose. The use of a core set of items facilitates information-sharing across sectors and continuity of care. In addition, they reduce duplication of assessment through the electronic transfer of information, facilitate care planning and quality assurance, and support service determination and allocation. Another key benefit of the interRAI system is the digital platform that offers clinicians, researchers, and policymakers a wealth of real-time and aggregated data. Workshop purpose: In this interactive workshop, we will discuss international experiences with implementing the interRAI system, including factors for success and mitigation strategies to overcome barriers. Attendees will be immersed in a simulated multi-stakeholder, multidisciplinary approach, using problem-solving skills to tackle the challenges of the implementation of this integrated digital health solution. Working on real case studies of large-scale implementations (e.g., Canada, Ireland, Belgium, USA, New Zealand) participants will assume the role of different stakeholders. Through an international lens, presenters from countries at different stages of implementation of interRAI, will show very concrete cases and explore challenges and benefits of the system. Workshop Structure and Objectives: This 90-minute workshop will begin with a short presentation (~15 min.) about the implementation of the interRAI-Suite in the Republic of Ireland, Canada, the USA, New Zealand, and Belgium, focusing on how the interRAI digital platform is being implemented in each country. After the presentation, attendees will split into small groups, receiving a concrete case detailing one topic from the implementation in one of the five countries. Participants will receive different roles (managers of care organizations, policymakers, professional caregivers, patients) and will discuss the challenges exposed in the case studies and how they might solve these issues (~40 min.). One example of a topic could be: What is the ideal balance between bottom-up and top-down implementation of an integrated health assessment such as the interRAI? Co-authors experienced in large-scale implementation of this integrated health information system will guide the group discussions. At the end, groups will share their insights (~20 min.) with all participants. The session will end with a short presentation to summarize the main implementation challenges and the actions taken that led to successful outcomes (~15 min). By the end of this workshop, participants will be able to: Describe how an electronic health information system, such as the interRAI Suite, can facilitate integrated care Compare strategies used to mitigate barriers in the implementation of integrated health information systems Explain how a multi-stakeholder approach can help to achieve change management, engaging with the people involved for more participation and acceptance. Audience: This interactive workshop will be suitable for all participants of the conference, from researchers to care providers, as well as policymakers. Participants do not need to have any specific prior knowledge. The goal is to collaborate in the group toward a successful implementation.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,047 | 0,036 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Communication savante | 0,010 | 0,015 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,012 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,006 | 0,011 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,010 | 0,003 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».