Review of Qualitative Research Methods in Health Information System Studies.

IF 2.3 Q3 MEDICAL INFORMATICS Healthcare Informatics Research Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-31 DOI:10.4258/hir.2024.30.1.16
Kyoungsoo Park, Woojong Moon
{"title":"Review of Qualitative Research Methods in Health Information System Studies.","authors":"Kyoungsoo Park, Woojong Moon","doi":"10.4258/hir.2024.30.1.16","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim of this study was to review hospital-based health information system (HIS) studies that used qualitative research methods and evaluate their methodological contexts and implications. In addition, we propose practical guidelines for HIS researchers who plan to use qualitative research methods.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We collected papers published from 2012 to 2022 by searching the PubMed and CINAHL databases. As search keywords, we used specific system terms related to HISs, such as \"electronic medical records\" and \"clinical decision support systems,\" linked with their operational terms, such as \"implementation\" and \"adaptation,\" and qualitative methodological terms such as \"observation\" and \"in-depth interview.\" We finally selected 74 studies that met this review's inclusion criteria and conducted an analytical review of the selected studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We analyzed the selected articles according to the following four points: the general characteristics of the selected articles; research design; participant sampling, identification, and recruitment; and data collection, processing, and analysis. This review found methodologically problematic issues regarding researchers' reflections, participant sampling methods and research accessibility, and data management.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Reports on the qualitative research process should include descriptions of researchers' reflections and ethical considerations, which are meaningful for strengthening the rigor and credibility of qualitative research. Based on these discussions, we suggest guidance for conducting ethical, feasible, and reliable qualitative research on HISs in hospital settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":12947,"journal":{"name":"Healthcare Informatics Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10879827/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Healthcare Informatics Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4258/hir.2024.30.1.16","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to review hospital-based health information system (HIS) studies that used qualitative research methods and evaluate their methodological contexts and implications. In addition, we propose practical guidelines for HIS researchers who plan to use qualitative research methods.

Methods: We collected papers published from 2012 to 2022 by searching the PubMed and CINAHL databases. As search keywords, we used specific system terms related to HISs, such as "electronic medical records" and "clinical decision support systems," linked with their operational terms, such as "implementation" and "adaptation," and qualitative methodological terms such as "observation" and "in-depth interview." We finally selected 74 studies that met this review's inclusion criteria and conducted an analytical review of the selected studies.

Results: We analyzed the selected articles according to the following four points: the general characteristics of the selected articles; research design; participant sampling, identification, and recruitment; and data collection, processing, and analysis. This review found methodologically problematic issues regarding researchers' reflections, participant sampling methods and research accessibility, and data management.

Conclusions: Reports on the qualitative research process should include descriptions of researchers' reflections and ethical considerations, which are meaningful for strengthening the rigor and credibility of qualitative research. Based on these discussions, we suggest guidance for conducting ethical, feasible, and reliable qualitative research on HISs in hospital settings.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
卫生信息系统研究中的定性研究方法综述》。
研究目的本研究旨在回顾以医院为基础、使用定性研究方法的医疗信息系统(HIS)研究,并评估其方法论背景和影响。此外,我们还为计划使用定性研究方法的 HIS 研究人员提出了实用指南:我们通过检索 PubMed 和 CINAHL 数据库,收集了 2012 年至 2022 年发表的论文。作为检索关键词,我们使用了与 HIS 相关的特定系统术语,如 "电子病历 "和 "临床决策支持系统",并将其与操作术语(如 "实施 "和 "适应")以及定性方法术语(如 "观察 "和 "深入访谈")联系起来。我们最终选择了 74 篇符合本综述纳入标准的研究,并对所选研究进行了分析性综述:我们根据以下四点对所选文章进行了分析:所选文章的总体特征;研究设计;参与者抽样、识别和招募;数据收集、处理和分析。本综述发现,在研究者的反思、参与者抽样方法和研究的可及性以及数据管理方面存在方法论问题:关于定性研究过程的报告应包括对研究人员的反思和伦理考虑因素的描述,这对加强定性研究的严谨性和可信度很有意义。基于以上讨论,我们为在医院环境中开展符合伦理、可行且可靠的 HIS 定性研究提出了指导建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Healthcare Informatics Research
Healthcare Informatics Research MEDICAL INFORMATICS-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
6.90%
发文量
44
期刊最新文献
Status and Trends of the Digital Healthcare Industry. Technology and Access to Healthcare with Different Scheduling Systems: A Scoping Review. Associations between Nicotine Dependence, Smartphone Usage Patterns, and Expected Compliance with a Smoking Cessation Application among Smokers. ChatGPT Predicts In-Hospital All-Cause Mortality for Sepsis: In-Context Learning with the Korean Sepsis Alliance Database. Data Market-related Issues in the Medical Field: Accelerating Digital Healthcare.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1