Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
STARE-HI -Statement on Reporting of Evaluation Studies in Health Informatics
54
Zitationen
6
Autoren
2009
Jahr
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Development of guidelines for publication of evaluation studies of Health Informatics applications. METHODS: An initial list of issues to be addressed in reports on evaluation studies was drafted based on experiences as editors and reviewers and as authors of systematic reviews , taking into account guidelines for reporting of medical research. This list has been discussed in several rounds by an increasing number of experts in Health Informatics evaluation during conferences and by using e-mail. RESULTS: A set of STARE-HI principles to be addressed in papers describing evaluations of Health Informatics interventions is presented. These principles include formulation of title and abstract, of introduction (e.g. scientific background, study objectives), study context (e.g. organizational setting, system details), methods (e.g. study design, outcome measures), results (e.g. study findings, unexpected observations) and discussion and conclusion. CONCLUSION: A comprehensive list of principles relevant for properly describing Health Informatics evaluations has been developed. When manuscripts submitted to Health Informatics journals and general medical journals adhere to these aspects, readers will be better positioned to place the studies in a proper context and judge their validity and generalisability. STARE-HI may also be used for study planning and hence positively influence the quality of evaluation studies in Health Informatics. We believe that better publication of (both quantitative and qualitative) evaluation studies is an important step toward the vision of evidence-based Health Informatics. LIMITATIONS: This study is based on experiences from editors, reviewers, authors of systematic reviews and readers of the scientific literature. The applicability of the principles has not been evaluated in real practice. Only when authors start to use these principles for reporting, shortcomings in the principles will emerge.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement
2009 · 83.089 Zit.
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
2009 · 63.587 Zit.
Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses
2003 · 62.236 Zit.
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement.
2009 · 45.128 Zit.
The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration
2009 · 27.785 Zit.