Suppr超能文献

美国与中国医学信息学及继续医学教育的差距:2016年会议比较

The Gap in Medical Informatics and Continuing Education Between the United States and China: A Comparison of Conferences in 2016.

作者信息

Liang Jun, Wei Kunyan, Meng Qun, Chen Zhenying, Zhang Jiajie, Lei Jianbo

机构信息

Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine,Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.

Department of Gastroenterology, Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, China.

出版信息

J Med Internet Res. 2017 Jun 21;19(6):e224. doi: 10.2196/jmir.8014.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

China launched its second health reform in 2010 with considerable investments in medical informatics (MI). However, to the best of our knowledge, research on the outcomes of this ambitious undertaking has been limited.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to understand the development of MI and the state of continuing education in China and the United States from the perspective of conferences.

METHODS

We conducted a quantitative and qualitative analysis of four MI conferences in China and two in the United States: China Medical Information Association Annual Symposium (CMIAAS), China Hospital Information Network Annual Conference (CHINC), China Health Information Technology Exchange Annual Conference (CHITEC), China Annual Proceeding of Medical Informatics (CPMI) versus the American Medical Informatics Association (AMIA) and Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society (HIMSS). The scale, composition, and regional distribution of attendees, topics, and research fields for each conference were summarized and compared.

RESULTS

CMIAAS and CPMI are mainstream academic conferences, while CHINC and CHITEC are industry conferences in China. Compared to HIMSS 2016, the meeting duration of CHITEC was 3 versus 5 days, the number of conference sessions was 132 versus 950+, the number of attendees was 5000 versus 40,000+, the number of vendors was 152 versus 1400+, the number of subforums was 12 versus 230, the number of preconference education symposiums and workshops was 0 versus 12, and the duration of preconference educational symposiums and workshops was 0 versus 1 day. Compared to AMIA, the meeting duration of Chinese CMIAAS was 2 versus 5 days, the number of conference sessions was 42 versus 110, the number of attendees was 200 versus 2500+, the number of vendors was 5 versus 75+, and the number of subforums was 4 versus 10. The number of preconference tutorials and working groups was 0 versus 29, and the duration of tutorials and working group was 0 versus 1.5 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the size of the Chinese economy and the substantial investment in MI, the output in terms of conferences remains low. The impact of conferences on continuing education to professionals is not significant. Chinese researchers and professionals should approach MI with greater rigor, including validated research methods, formal training, and effective continuing education, in order to utilize knowledge gained by other countries and to expand collaboration.

摘要

背景

2010年中国启动了第二次卫生改革,对医学信息学(MI)投入了大量资金。然而,据我们所知,对这项宏伟事业的成果研究有限。

目的

我们的目标是从会议的角度了解中国和美国医学信息学的发展以及继续教育状况。

方法

我们对中国的4个医学信息学会议和美国的2个会议进行了定量和定性分析:中国医学信息学会年会(CMIAAS)、中国医院信息网络年会(CHINC)、中国卫生信息技术交流年会(CHITEC)、中国医学信息学年会论文集(CPMI),并与美国医学信息学会(AMIA)和医疗保健信息与管理系统学会(HIMSS)进行对比。总结并比较了每个会议的参会人员规模、构成和地区分布、主题以及研究领域。

结果

CMIAAS和CPMI是中国的主流学术会议,而CHINC和CHITEC是行业会议。与2016年的HIMSS相比,CHITEC的会议时长为3天,而HIMSS为5天;会议场次为132场,而HIMSS超过950场;参会人数为5000人,而HIMSS超过40000人;参展商数量为152家,而HIMSS超过1400家;分论坛数量为12个,而HIMSS为230个;会前教育研讨会和工作坊数量为0个,而HIMSS为12个;会前教育研讨会和工作坊的时长为0天,而HIMSS为1天。与AMIA相比,中国CMIAAS的会议时长为2天,而AMIA为5天;会议场次为42场,而AMIA为110场;参会人数为200人,而AMIA超过2500人;参展商数量为5家,而AMIA超过75家;分论坛数量为4个,而AMIA为10个;会前辅导课程和工作组数量为0个,而AMIA为29个;辅导课程和工作组的时长为0天,而AMIA为1.5天。

结论

鉴于中国的经济规模以及对医学信息学的大量投资,会议产出仍然较低。会议对专业人员继续教育的影响并不显著。中国的研究人员和专业人员应该更严谨地对待医学信息学,包括采用经过验证的研究方法、接受正规培训以及开展有效的继续教育,以便借鉴其他国家的知识并扩大合作。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验