Usher Institute, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
School of Informatics, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
J Gen Intern Med. 2023 Dec;38(16):3610-3615. doi: 10.1007/s11606-023-08405-y. Epub 2023 Sep 15.
Evaluating healthcare digitalisation, where technology implementation and adoption transforms existing socio-organisational processes, presents various challenges for outcome assessments. Populations are diverse, interventions are complex and evolving over time, meaningful comparisons are difficult as outcomes vary between settings, and outcomes take a long time to materialise and stabilise. Digitalisation may also have unanticipated impacts. We here discuss the limitations of evaluating the digitalisation of healthcare, and describe how qualitative and quantitative approaches can complement each other to facilitate investment and implementation decisions. In doing so, we argue how existing approaches have focused on measuring what is easily measurable and elevating poorly chosen values to inform investment decisions. Limited attention has been paid to understanding processes that are not easily measured even though these can have significant implications for contextual transferability, sustainability and scale-up of interventions. We use what is commonly known as the McNamara Fallacy to structure our discussions. We conclude with recommendations on how we envisage the development of mixed methods approaches going forward in order to address shortcomings.
评估医疗保健数字化,即技术实施和采用改变现有社会-组织流程,对结果评估提出了各种挑战。人群多样,干预措施复杂且随时间不断演变,由于结果在不同环境中存在差异,因此难以进行有意义的比较,并且结果需要很长时间才能显现和稳定。数字化也可能产生意想不到的影响。我们在这里讨论评估医疗保健数字化的局限性,并描述定性和定量方法如何相互补充,以促进投资和实施决策。在这样做的过程中,我们认为现有的方法侧重于衡量易于衡量的内容,并将选择不当的价值观提升到决策投资层面。尽管这些对于干预措施的上下文可转移性、可持续性和规模化具有重要意义,但对难以衡量的过程的关注有限。我们使用通常被称为麦克纳马拉谬论的方法来组织我们的讨论。最后,我们就如何设想未来混合方法的发展提出建议,以解决这些缺点。