Implementing health information systems to support integrated care delivery: Learning from international challenges.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.047 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".