AcademyHealth, 1150 17th Street NW, Suite 600, Washington, DC 20036, USA.
J Comp Eff Res. 2012 Sep;1(5):441-51. doi: 10.2217/cer.12.47.
BACKGROUND & SIGNIFICANCE: The AcademyHealth Electronic Data Methods Forum aims to advance the national dialogue on the use of electronic clinical data (ECD) for comparative effectiveness research (CER), patient-centered outcomes research, and quality improvement by facilitating exchange and collaboration among eleven research projects and external stakeholders. AcademyHealth conducted a mixed-method needs assessment with the Electronic Data Methods Forum's key stakeholders to assess: stakeholder views on developing new infrastructure for CER using ECD; current gaps in knowledge with respect to CER; and expectations for a learning health system.
AcademyHealth conducted 50 stakeholder interviews between August 2011 and November 2011 with participants from the following seven stakeholder groups: government, business/payer, industry, healthcare delivery, patient/consumer, nonprofit/policy and research. With input from key collaborators, AcademyHealth designed a semi-structured interview guide and a short survey. Reviewers used the qualitative data analysis software NVivo to code the transcripts and to identify and manage complex concepts. Quantitative data from the questionnaire has been integrated with the final analysis as relevant.
The analysis of recurring concepts in the interviews focus on five central themes: stakeholders have substantial expectations for CER using ECD, both with respect to addressing the limitations of traditional research studies, and generating meaningful evidence for decision-making and improving patient outcomes; stakeholders are aware of many challenges related to implementing CER with ECD, including the need to develop appropriate governance, assess and manage data quality, and develop methods to address confounding in observational data; stakeholders continue to struggle to define 'patient-centeredness' in CER using ECD, adding complexity to attaining this goal; stakeholders express that improving translation and dissemination of CER, and how research can be 'useful' at the point of care, can help mitigate negative perceptions of the CER 'brand'; and stakeholders perceive a need for a substantial 'culture shift' to facilitate collaborative science and new ways of conducting biomedical and outcomes research. Many stakeholders proposed approaches or solutions they felt might address the challenges identified.
背景与意义:为了推动使用电子临床数据(ECD)进行比较效果研究(CER)、以患者为中心的结果研究和质量改进的全国对话,学院健康电子数据方法论坛旨在通过促进十一个研究项目和外部利益相关者之间的交流与合作来实现这一目标。学院健康对电子数据方法论坛的主要利益相关者进行了混合方法需求评估,以评估:利益相关者对使用 ECD 为 CER 开发新基础设施的看法;CER 方面目前的知识差距;以及对学习健康系统的期望。
2011 年 8 月至 11 月,学院健康对来自以下七个利益相关者群体的 50 名利益相关者进行了访谈:政府、企业/付款人、行业、医疗服务提供、患者/消费者、非营利/政策和研究。在主要合作者的帮助下,学院健康设计了一份半结构化访谈指南和一份简短的调查问卷。审查员使用定性数据分析软件 NVivo 对转录本进行编码,并识别和管理复杂概念。问卷的定量数据已与最终分析整合,以作参考。
对访谈中反复出现的概念的分析集中在五个核心主题上:利益相关者对使用 ECD 进行 CER 抱有很大的期望,这不仅涉及到解决传统研究的局限性,还涉及到为决策制定和改善患者结果生成有意义的证据;利益相关者意识到在使用 ECD 进行 CER 方面存在许多挑战,包括需要制定适当的治理措施、评估和管理数据质量,以及开发方法来解决观察性数据中的混杂因素;利益相关者在使用 ECD 进行 CER 时仍在努力定义“以患者为中心”,这给实现这一目标增加了复杂性;利益相关者表示,改善 CER 的转化和传播,以及如何使研究在护理点变得“有用”,可以帮助减轻对 CER“品牌”的负面看法;利益相关者认为需要进行实质性的“文化转变”,以促进合作科学和新的生物医学和结果研究方法。许多利益相关者提出了他们认为可能解决所确定挑战的方法或解决方案。