• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

相似文献

1
Quantitating and assessing interoperability between electronic health records.定量评估电子健康记录之间的互操作性。
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2022 Apr 13;29(5):753-760. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocab289.
2
Quantifying the competitiveness of the electronic health record market and its implications for interoperability.量化电子健康记录市场的竞争力及其对互操作性的影响。
Int J Med Inform. 2020 Apr;136:104037. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2019.104037. Epub 2019 Nov 27.
3
What do electronic health record vendors reveal about their products: an analysis of vendor websites.电子健康记录供应商对其产品有何披露:对供应商网站的分析
J Med Internet Res. 2013 Feb 19;15(2):e36. doi: 10.2196/jmir.2312.
4
Perceptions of chief clinical information officers on the state of electronic health records systems interoperability in NHS England: a qualitative interview study.英国国家医疗服务体系中首席临床信息官对电子健康记录系统互操作性现状的看法:一项定性访谈研究。
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2023 Aug 12;23(1):158. doi: 10.1186/s12911-023-02255-8.
5
Vendor of choice and the effectiveness of policies to promote health information exchange.首选供应商以及促进健康信息交换政策的有效性。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Jun 4;18(1):405. doi: 10.1186/s12913-018-3230-7.
6
Electronic Health Records and Pulmonary Function Data: Developing an Interoperability Roadmap. An Official American Thoracic Society Workshop Report.电子健康记录与肺功能数据:制定互操作性路线图。美国胸科学会官方研讨会报告。
Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2021 Jan;18(1):1-11. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.202010-1318ST.
7
A framework for evaluating electronic health record vendor user-centered design and usability testing processes.一个用于评估电子健康记录供应商以用户为中心的设计和可用性测试流程的框架。
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2017 Apr 1;24(e1):e35-e39. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocw092.
8
Electronic Health Records Data and Metadata: Challenges for Big Data in the United States.电子健康记录数据和元数据:美国大数据面临的挑战。
Big Data. 2013 Dec;1(4):245-51. doi: 10.1089/big.2013.0023. Epub 2013 Dec 14.
9
Assessing hospital electronic health record vendor performance across publicly reported quality measures.评估医院电子健康记录供应商在公开报告的质量指标方面的表现。
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2021 Sep 18;28(10):2101-2107. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocab120.
10
The impact of electronic health record (EHR) interoperability on immunization information system (IIS) data quality.电子健康记录(EHR)互操作性对免疫信息系统(IIS)数据质量的影响。
Online J Public Health Inform. 2016 Sep 15;8(2):e184. doi: 10.5210/ojphi.v8i2.6380. eCollection 2016.

引用本文的文献

1
Lessons Learned From Building a Data Platform for Longitudinal, Analytical Use Cases and Scaling to 77 German Hospitals: Implementation Report.从构建用于纵向分析用例的数据平台并扩展至77家德国医院中汲取的经验教训:实施报告
JMIR Med Inform. 2025 Sep 12;13:e69853. doi: 10.2196/69853.
2
Enhancing healthcare data privacy and interoperability with federated learning.通过联邦学习增强医疗保健数据隐私和互操作性。
PeerJ Comput Sci. 2025 May 8;11:e2870. doi: 10.7717/peerj-cs.2870. eCollection 2025.
3
Examining How Technology Supports Shared Decision-Making in Oncology Consultations: Qualitative Thematic Analysis.审视技术如何支持肿瘤学会诊中的共同决策:定性主题分析
JMIR Cancer. 2025 Jun 11;11:e70827. doi: 10.2196/70827.
4
Barriers to the implementation of large-scale electronic health record systems in primary healthcare centers: a mixed-methods study in Saudi Arabia.沙特阿拉伯初级医疗保健中心大规模电子健康记录系统实施的障碍:一项混合方法研究
Front Med (Lausanne). 2025 Apr 15;12:1516714. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2025.1516714. eCollection 2025.
5
As Suicide Prediction With Artificial Intelligence Moves Forward, Barriers to Implementation Remain.随着人工智能在自杀预测方面的进展,实施过程中的障碍依然存在。
Mayo Clin Proc Digit Health. 2023 Dec 26;2(1):41-43. doi: 10.1016/j.mcpdig.2023.11.009. eCollection 2024 Mar.
6
Implementing a Common Data Model in Ophthalmology: Mapping Structured Electronic Health Record Ophthalmic Examination Data to Standard Vocabularies.在眼科实施通用数据模型:将结构化电子健康记录眼科检查数据映射到标准词汇表。
Ophthalmol Sci. 2024 Nov 28;5(2):100666. doi: 10.1016/j.xops.2024.100666. eCollection 2025 Mar-Apr.
7
Real-World Evidence on Adverse Events and Healthcare Resource Utilization in Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukaemia in Spain Using Natural Language Processing: The SRealCLL Study.利用自然语言处理技术获取的西班牙慢性淋巴细胞白血病患者不良事件和医疗资源利用情况的真实世界证据:SRealCLL研究
Cancers (Basel). 2024 Nov 29;16(23):4004. doi: 10.3390/cancers16234004.
8
Safety and usability of oncology information systems - a systematic review.肿瘤学信息系统的安全性与可用性——一项系统综述
Front Oncol. 2024 Nov 28;14:1231757. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1231757. eCollection 2024.
9
Critical Data for Critical Care: A Primer on Leveraging Electronic Health Record Data for Research From Society of Critical Care Medicine's Panel on Data Sharing and Harmonization.危重症关键数据:利用电子健康记录数据进行研究的指南——来自危重病医学会数据共享与协调专家组
Crit Care Explor. 2024 Nov 15;6(11):e1179. doi: 10.1097/CCE.0000000000001179. eCollection 2024 Nov.
10
Laboratory Data as a Potential Source of Bias in Healthcare Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Models.实验室数据可能成为医疗人工智能和机器学习模型的偏差来源。
Ann Lab Med. 2025 Jan 1;45(1):12-21. doi: 10.3343/alm.2024.0323. Epub 2024 Oct 24.

本文引用的文献

1
Development of CancerLinQ, a Health Information Learning Platform From Multiple Electronic Health Record Systems to Support Improved Quality of Care.开发 CancerLinQ,一个从多个电子健康记录系统获取健康信息的学习平台,以支持改善医疗质量。
JCO Clin Cancer Inform. 2020 Oct;4:929-937. doi: 10.1200/CCI.20.00064.
2
Quantifying the competitiveness of the electronic health record market and its implications for interoperability.量化电子健康记录市场的竞争力及其对互操作性的影响。
Int J Med Inform. 2020 Apr;136:104037. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2019.104037. Epub 2019 Nov 27.
3
The HITECH Era in Retrospect.回顾医疗信息技术经济与临床健康法案时代
N Engl J Med. 2017 Sep 7;377(10):907-909. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1709851.
4
The value of health care information exchange and interoperability.医疗保健信息交换与互操作性的价值。
Health Aff (Millwood). 2005 Jan-Jun;Suppl Web Exclusives:W5-10-W5-18. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.w5.10.
5
LOINC, a universal standard for identifying laboratory observations: a 5-year update.LOINC,一种用于识别实验室检查结果的通用标准:5年更新情况
Clin Chem. 2003 Apr;49(4):624-33. doi: 10.1373/49.4.624.

定量评估电子健康记录之间的互操作性。

Quantitating and assessing interoperability between electronic health records.

机构信息

School of Biomedical Informatics, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas, USA.

Department of Internal Medicine, McGovern Medical School, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas, USA.

出版信息

J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2022 Apr 13;29(5):753-760. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocab289.

DOI:10.1093/jamia/ocab289
PMID:35015861
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9006690/
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Electronic health records (EHRs) contain a large quantity of machine-readable data. However, institutions choose different EHR vendors, and the same product may be implemented differently at different sites. Our goal was to quantify the interoperability of real-world EHR implementations with respect to clinically relevant structured data.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed de-identified and aggregated data from 68 oncology sites that implemented 1 of 5 EHR vendor products. Using 6 medications and 6 laboratory tests for which well-accepted standards exist, we calculated inter- and intra-EHR vendor interoperability scores.

RESULTS

The mean intra-EHR vendor interoperability score was 0.68 as compared to a mean of 0.22 for inter-system interoperability, when weighted by number of systems of each type, and 0.57 and 0.20 when not weighting by number of systems of each type.

DISCUSSION

In contrast to data elements required for successful billing, clinically relevant data elements are rarely standardized, even though applicable standards exist. We chose a representative sample of laboratory tests and medications for oncology practices, but our set of data elements should be seen as an example, rather than a definitive list.

CONCLUSIONS

We defined and demonstrated a quantitative measure of interoperability between site EHR systems and within/between implemented vendor systems. Two sites that share the same vendor are, on average, more interoperable. However, even for implementation of the same EHR product, interoperability is not guaranteed. Our results can inform institutional EHR selection, analysis, and optimization for interoperability.

摘要

目的

电子健康记录(EHR)包含大量可机读数据。然而,各机构选择的 EHR 供应商不同,同一产品在不同地点的实施方式也可能不同。我们的目标是量化实际 EHR 实施在临床相关结构化数据方面的互操作性。

材料和方法

我们分析了来自 68 个实施了 5 种 EHR 供应商产品之一的肿瘤学站点的去识别和汇总数据。使用 6 种药物和 6 种存在公认标准的实验室检测,我们计算了 EHR 供应商内部和之间的互操作性得分。

结果

与系统间互操作性的平均值 0.22 相比,在按每种类型系统数量加权时,EHR 供应商内部互操作性的平均值为 0.68,而在不按每种类型系统数量加权时,平均值分别为 0.57 和 0.20。

讨论

与成功计费所需的数据元素相比,临床相关数据元素很少标准化,即使存在适用的标准。我们选择了肿瘤学实践中具有代表性的实验室检测和药物样本,但我们的数据元素集应被视为一个示例,而不是一个确定的列表。

结论

我们定义并演示了站点 EHR 系统之间以及实施的供应商系统内部/之间互操作性的定量度量。共享同一供应商的两个站点平均更具互操作性。然而,即使实施相同的 EHR 产品,也不能保证互操作性。我们的结果可以为机构的 EHR 选择、分析和优化互操作性提供信息。