Learning Health Systems最新文献

{"title":"Structuring Collaboration Between Researchers and Operational Innovators: Diffusing New Practices Across the Veteran's Administration Healthcare System","authors":"Sudha R. Raman,&nbsp;Jennifer M. Gierisch,&nbsp;Miriam A. Kirshner,&nbsp;Kristopher R. Teague,&nbsp;Jaifred Christian F. Lopez,&nbsp;Blake Henderson,&nbsp;Ryan J. Vega,&nbsp;Beth Ripley,&nbsp;Amy M. Kilbourne,&nbsp;George L. Jackson","doi":"10.1002/lrh2.70048","DOIUrl":"10.1002/lrh2.70048","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>To support a learning health system, we aimed to develop processes and tools to enable collaboration between the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) operations and research sectors in the implementation of promising healthcare innovations.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The collaboration process involved: (1) holding foundational partnership meetings between operations and health research sector leadership (2) reviewing existing research–operations collaborations frameworks, (3) developing a framework with criteria for systematically categorizing innovations into defined pathways that integrate research and operational considerations, and (4) adapting known participatory approaches to collect information for productive collaboration. Clearly delineating the skills, goals, and perspectives of the innovation and research sectors during partnership meetings enabled assessment of the value and trade-offs of advancing an innovation into practice. The literature review of existing frameworks yielded heterogeneous objectives, domains, and criteria for evaluation. Across framework domains, commonalities (e.g., alignment with institutional goals), differences (e.g., attention to sustainment), and gaps (e.g., health equity focus) were noted. We developed five research–innovation partnership pathways and criteria to vet and categorize potential innovations (i.e., evidence for effectiveness and implementation, risks, equity, feasibility, and sustainability). We developed a menu of participatory processes to elicit feedback on innovations.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We applied this process with an innovation to refine and evaluate the process, pathways, and criteria. Surveys of diverse partners (clinicians, administrators, researchers) ranked the innovation using our developed criteria, and placed the innovation on a pathway, which then helped guide next steps for evaluating the innovations. Overall, the process was feasible. We were able to categorize and plan next steps for promising innovations.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This theoretically grounded, iterative process may serve as a blueprint to accelerate the implementation of healthcare innovations. Through these intentional and participatory processes to engage operations innovators and health services researchers we can speed the delivery of promising innovations that impact patient care.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":43916,"journal":{"name":"Learning Health Systems","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2025-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12812486/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146012789","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Provision of Massive Open Online Courses in Just-in-Time Modalities: Experience Report of the OpenWHO.org Platform's 7 Years of Learning Response to Health Emergencies","authors":"Heini Utunen,&nbsp;Corentin Piroux,&nbsp;Giselle Balaciano,&nbsp;Elliot Brennan,&nbsp;Melissa Attias,&nbsp;Lama Mattar","doi":"10.1002/lrh2.70058","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/lrh2.70058","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>A learning health system requires infrastructure to support its learning community. The World Health Organization's OpenWHO.org, launched in 2017, aimed to provide such infrastructure through a learning platform to equip emergency responders, health workers, and other stakeholders with critical knowledge and skills to manage health crises effectively. The free, open-access, self-paced learning platform addressed a wide range of public health topics. This experience report summarizes OpenWHO's impact over its 7 years as a cornerstone platform for just-in-time online learning in health emergencies.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>A descriptive review of practice-led literature at WHO was used to report on the lessons learned to prepare for the next pandemic. The research focused on the design, development, and delivery of online courses via the platform. Our analysis comprises insights gathered from 32 studies.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Over 7 years, OpenWHO reached 9.2 million enrolments globally, delivering over 315 public health courses across 75 languages with use cases in all countries and territories. The platform has been instrumental in enhancing global health capacity, disseminating knowledge, and improving preparedness for health crises, including major outbreaks such as COVID-19. Key lessons learned include providing learning content in just-in-time modalities, addressing digital divides, and adapting content for diverse cultural and linguistic contexts with an endeavor to ensure equity, inclusivity, and scalability in global health learning.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>OpenWHO has significantly contributed to empowering the global health workforce, driving low-bandwidth innovation in online education, and ensuring equitable access to critical knowledge during emergencies. Beyond documenting OpenWHO's outcomes, this experience report provides a transferable framework that can guide future Massive Open Online Courses initiatives in delivering equitable, just-in-time learning during public health emergencies.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":43916,"journal":{"name":"Learning Health Systems","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2025-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/lrh2.70058","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145983881","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Equity Dashboards in a Statewide Surgical Quality Collaborative: A Mixed Methods Pre-Implementation Study","authors":"Erin E. Isenberg,&nbsp;Natalie M. Guzman,&nbsp;Sarah E. Bradley,&nbsp;Michael J. Englesbe,&nbsp;Pasithorn A. Suwanabol,&nbsp;Calista M. Harbaugh","doi":"10.1002/lrh2.70055","DOIUrl":"10.1002/lrh2.70055","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Collaborative quality initiatives have leveraged performance dashboards and cross-institutional learning to improve surgical outcomes. However, these models for quality improvement have yet to integrate tools for improving health disparities. In this mixed-methods pre-implementation project, we assessed the interpretability and utility of health equity dashboards in a statewide quality collaborative.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This mixed methods study was guided by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Stakeholders from hospitals participating in the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative (MSQC) were recruited for a survey (<i>n</i> = 105) or focus group (<i>n</i> = 6). The survey assessed knowledge, clarity, and usability of a health equity dashboard. Focus groups provided in-depth qualitative feedback on a site-specific health equity dashboard. We integrated a content analysis of survey results and thematic analysis of focus groups.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>There were 105 survey respondents. Perceived clarity of the dashboard was high (73/105, 70% agree or strongly agree information is clear and understandable), but misinterpretation was common (46%–49% incorrect interpretation). Focus groups revealed sources of misinterpretation as a lack of familiarity with exposure variables and uncertainty about the meaning of results. Respondents reported a high likelihood of dashboard use (71/104, 74% somewhat or extremely likely to use) and expressed optimism about potential uses and belief in the importance of the work. However, key barriers from participants included limited experience with equity dashboards, concerns about data integrity and representation, and the need for additional tools to enable actionable change.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This work identifies key factors that influence the successful implementation of health equity dashboards, providing valuable insights to strengthen infrastructure within learning health systems and advance equity-conscious quality improvement.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":43916,"journal":{"name":"Learning Health Systems","volume":"10 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2025-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12900617/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146203220","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Engaging Patients in Learning Health Systems Research Using Human Centered Design: A Scoping Review","authors":"Dorsa Moslehi,&nbsp;Lynn A. Volk,&nbsp;Samantha A. Lee,&nbsp;Paul A. Bain,&nbsp;Jeanne-Marie Guise","doi":"10.1002/lrh2.70051","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/lrh2.70051","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;div&gt;\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Introduction&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;The “Learning Health System” (LHS) relies on meaningful patient and public engagement to foster innovation in healthcare. However, effective methods for involving these stakeholders in LHS research are unclear. This scoping review examines the use of Human-Centered Design (HCD) to engage patients and the public in LHS research.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Methods&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;Following Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and PRISMA-ScR guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science for LHS research studies using HCD to engage patients and the public. Data were categorized by: (1) Study Characteristics, (2) Participant Characteristics and Group Dynamics, (3) HCD Approach, Stages, and Methods, (4) Participant Satisfaction and Engagement, and (5) Focused Demographic Participation.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Results&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;Among the included studies, participants in the HCD process included children and adults with conditions such as cancer, dementia, and stroke, often joined by their families and healthcare clinicians. Research spanned innovations in patient engagement, digital health, quality improvement, care delivery, environmental design, and clinical support tools. Participatory workshops were the most used HCD method. Group activities fostered creativity and diverse perspectives; individual activities offered deeper insights. A common challenge was limited engagement in later design stages, particularly prototyping. Studies involving harder-to-reach populations implemented extreme user design, creative design tools like photovoice and the &lt;i&gt;1-2-4-All&lt;/i&gt; technique, and community-based participatory research principles, all integrated into the HCD process.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Conclusions&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;Our review found HCD to be an effective method for engaging patients and the public in LHS research. It has been applied to engage individuals across a wide range of health conditions, age groups, and socioeconomic backgrounds, driving targeted innovations and system-level improvement. Its adaptability allows real-time adjustments in research pace and design, enabling iteration, strategy refinement, and inclusion of new populations as insights emerge. Blending discussion-based methods (e.g., interviews, workshops) with experiential approaches (e.g., role-playing, prototyping) boosts participant engagement and satisfaction. Future research should identify optimal group sizes, the most appropriate methods for each design stage, and the impact of integrating HCD with other r","PeriodicalId":43916,"journal":{"name":"Learning Health Systems","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2025-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/lrh2.70051","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146002143","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Access Improvement in Healthcare: Be Quick, but Don't Hurry?","authors":"Allen M. Chen","doi":"10.1002/lrh2.70052","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/lrh2.70052","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Access improvement is a fundamental component of value-based healthcare as it inherently promotes quality by eliminating chokepoints, redundancies, and inefficiencies that could hinder the provisioning of timely care. Yet as healthcare organizations struggle with cost containment, the question of how to most effectively enhance access remains largely unsolved. Given the economic, regulatory, and social forces across the healthcare marketplace, the critical importance of access in optimizing efficiency is increasingly being recognized. The purpose of this review is to thus present a practical framework that offers healthcare organizations an actionable, thematic-based foundation for approaching access improvement.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods and Materials</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>An interpretive synthesis of health access as it relates to the timely, satisfactory, and sustainable receipt of services was presented while addressing operational constraints, inclusivity and underlying determinants of health. The criticality of this concept, spanning the entire healthcare continuum and encompassing all aspects of care delivery, from making an initial appointment to completing treatment and being followed thereafter, was evaluated. Empirical lessons were highlighted for discussion.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Given the sense of urgency that exists around this issue, the potential pitfalls of “hurrying” to initiate access improvement are frequently overlooked by health systems. Considerations related to workforce shortages, resource limitations, logistical coordination, workflow processes, space capacity, provider availability, and organizational culture and hierarchy, among others, need to be methodically addressed so as not to introduce new inefficiencies into a healthcare environment that is already viewed by many as overly bureaucratic. Based on the core themes that emerged, a conceptual framework for access improvement centered on strategy, alignment, execution, adaptation, and reflection was developed.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The design, planning, and operationalization of access improvement initiatives in healthcare require meticulous organizational preparation and a deliberate leadership approach incorporating principles of change management. Success will be dependent on achieving the appropriate balance between speed, purpose, and precision.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":43916,"journal":{"name":"Learning Health Systems","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2025-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/lrh2.70052","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145986800","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"A Learning Health System Approach to Developing a Perinatal Safety Framework and Guide to Reduce Disparities in Maternal Harm","authors":"Angela D. Thomas,&nbsp;Tamika Auguste,&nbsp;Allan Fong,&nbsp;Aaron Z. Hettinger,&nbsp;Seth Krevat,&nbsp;Laura Lee,&nbsp;Emily Mutondo,&nbsp;Deborah F. Perry,&nbsp;Karey Sutton,&nbsp;Saanvi Garg,&nbsp;Loral Patchen","doi":"10.1002/lrh2.70057","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/lrh2.70057","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Maternal harm disproportionately affects Black birthing individuals, with systemic and provider-related factors contributing significantly to preventable severe maternal morbidity (SMM) and maternal mortality. Despite the severity of the crisis, traditional maternal safety approaches, which typically exclude patient voices, narrowly focus on severe harm events rather than conducting full-spectrum safety surveillance, which limits proactive intervention strategies.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This study applied the National Academies of Medicine's Learning Health System (LHS) principles to develop a comprehensive maternal safety framework. We employed a mixed-methods approach integrating patient-reported experiences of cases (patients experiencing severe maternal morbidity and/or postpartum readmission) and controls, provider perspectives, clinical informatics, natural language processing of clinical notes, and chart reviews to identify factors contributing to and mitigating maternal harm. We convened an interdisciplinary expert panel to synthesize findings into actionable recommendations for a Perinatal Safety Framework and a Perinatal Strategy Guide.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The Perinatal Maternal Safety Framework was developed to define the maternal safety continuum. Six key features emerged, including: (1) three distinct starting points (pregnancy, birth, postpartum), (2) variability in baseline circumstances, (3) a broad definition of maternal harm encompassing physical, emotional, and psychological factors, (4) adaptation of established safety models, (5) six categories of contributing and mitigating factors, and (6) status factors influencing maternal safety outcomes. The Perinatal Strategy Guide outlines evidence-based strategies addressing structural and systemic factors affecting maternal safety.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>A comprehensive maternal safety framework integrating full-spectrum safety surveillance and patient-centered reporting is critical to addressing maternal health disparities. By applying LHS principles, this study provides a data-driven, equity-focused approach to improving maternal safety. Implementation of the Perinatal Strategy Guide will require interdisciplinary collaboration and engagement of individuals with lived experience to drive systemic change.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":43916,"journal":{"name":"Learning Health Systems","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2025-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/lrh2.70057","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145969568","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Integrating Knowledge Translation: A Swiss Approach to Bridging Research and Health System Improvement","authors":"Natalie Harrison Messerli,&nbsp;Sarah Mantwill","doi":"10.1002/lrh2.70056","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/lrh2.70056","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The Swiss Learning Health System (SLHS), funded from 2017 to 2025, facilitated the movement of research to practice and policy, responding to national calls to enhance health services research and build research scientist capacity. This study evaluates the SLHS to understand how Learning Health System (LHS) science can provide a foundation for Knowledge Translation (KT) platforms at a national level, identifying successes, challenges, and lessons learned from capacity building and institutionalizing KT in support of evidence-informed decision-making (EIDM) in health policy and practice.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We employed a mixed-methods approach from September to December 2023, using the SLHS program aims and the Knowledge-to-Action framework to inform the study's conceptualization. Data collection involved two workshops with over 40 SLHS members, a survey of 39 members, and in-depth interviews with 10 key informants, analyzed using descriptive and thematic methods.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Capacity-building efforts prompting a cultural shift by training research scientists to adopt a science-policy-practice mindset were the most common successes captured. The LHS and KT approaches aided in dismantling silos and encouraged community building through participatory methods. An important lesson learned is the value of co-creation involving key partners, especially patients, in the research process to strengthen relevance, issue prioritization, and evidence use. However, challenges persisted in adequately tailoring and transferring knowledge, highlighting the need for more consistent engagement with community partners to enhance the impact and relevance of KT efforts.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This study demonstrated that the SLHS is a valued initiative for capacity building, while highlighting the need to strengthen co-creation and refine strategies for adapting research evidence for EIDM in health policy and practice.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":43916,"journal":{"name":"Learning Health Systems","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2025-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/lrh2.70056","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145983591","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Data Fit for Health Equity: Learning Health Systems, AI, and the STANDING Together Recommendations","authors":"Elinor Laws,&nbsp;Neil Cockburn","doi":"10.1002/lrh2.70053","DOIUrl":"10.1002/lrh2.70053","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools may deliver significant improvements in healthcare and Learning Health Systems are well positioned to benefit. However, during the adoption of AI, Learning Health Systems should consider the potential for AI to exacerbate health inequity and perpetuate biases that exist in healthcare and its associated data.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The STANDING Together recommendations provide a method to identify and report potential bias during the curation of datasets for AI and the development of AI from those datasets. The recommendations could form a key learning cycle within a Learning Health System ensuring transparent reporting of healthcare data use and the implementation of AI healthcare technologies that promote health equity.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results and Conclusions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Learning Health Systems are well placed to adopt the STANDING Together best practice recommendations for using healthcare data as they are likely to have both the capabilities to implement the recommendations and the strategic goals that will realize the value of health data and AI that promotes health equity. The STANDING Together recommendations are available from www.datadiversity.org.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":43916,"journal":{"name":"Learning Health Systems","volume":"10 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2025-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12900613/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146203252","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Embedding Systems Engineering Leadership in Learning Health Systems: The Case for a Chief Systems Engineer in Every Hospital","authors":"Md Doulotuzzaman Xames","doi":"10.1002/lrh2.70054","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/lrh2.70054","url":null,"abstract":"<p>As healthcare systems transition toward Learning Health Systems (LHS), the need for executive-level leadership in systems thinking becomes urgent. This commentary advocates for the institutionalization of a Chief Systems Engineer (CSE) role in hospitals to embed systems engineering (SE) principles within leadership structures, navigate complexity, integrate technology with clinical workflows, and drive continuous organizational learning. Drawing on lessons from high-reliability industries and existing healthcare initiatives, this commentary argues that establishing dedicated SE leadership is essential for achieving both horizontal and vertical integration across clinical, operational, and strategic domains. It outlines the responsibilities of the CSE, aligns them with LHS goals, and offers recommendations for sustained and scalable implementation across healthcare organizations.</p>","PeriodicalId":43916,"journal":{"name":"Learning Health Systems","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2025-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/lrh2.70054","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145983590","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Clinical Informatics Education to Advance Learning Health Systems: A Scoping Review","authors":"Alexandra Zingg,&nbsp;L. Ida Tovar,&nbsp;Laura Witte,&nbsp;Kelsey L. Koym,&nbsp;Kyler Godwin","doi":"10.1002/lrh2.70050","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/lrh2.70050","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Learning health systems leverage clinical data and knowledge to advance healthcare quality. Effective training in informatics concepts and tools is essential for medical trainees to become health system experts and contributors to positive organizational change. The objective of this study is to summarize characteristics of existing clinical informatics training programs and map these to recommended Learning Health System informatics competencies. We aim to answer the following research questions: (1) How are academic medical institutions implementing informatics education initiatives for medical trainees? (2) Are these initiatives implementing recommended informatics competencies? and (3) How effective are these initiatives according to established health professions education evaluation frameworks?</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We searched for literature in the databases Embase, Ovid Medline, and Web of Science. Three researchers independently screened study titles and abstracts. Inclusion criteria were (a) studies with medical students and/or postgraduate medical professionals in the study sample, (b) in an academic medical setting, and (c) describing a clinical informatics curriculum initiative.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We included a total of 27 studies for analysis. Most curricula (<i>n</i> = 16) had the objective of basic informatics knowledge acquisition. Instruction delivery for most (<i>n</i> = 17) included a combination of didactic and practical components. The most common evaluation tool was student self-reported confidence and self-efficacy. All but three of the studies integrated the recommended informatics competency of demonstrating knowledge of clinical information systems such as Electronic Health Records. Most studies (<i>n</i> = 12) reported outcomes related to the Kirkpatrick Level II of Learning.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Gaps remain in the context of leveraging education to pursue Learning Health System endeavors of clinical research, quality improvement, and achieving organizational-level results. Further research on recent education initiatives targeting undergraduate and graduate medical trainees is needed to elevate the rate of clinical informatics education implementation, while simultaneously advocating for standardization in the design and evaluation of these initiatives.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":43916,"journal":{"name":"Learning Health Systems","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2025-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/lrh2.70050","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146002079","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}