{"title":"关于医生对二次分析中重复使用电子健康记录数据的看法的定性研究。","authors":"Neal D Goldstein","doi":"10.1177/10497323241245644","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Electronic health records (EHRs) have become ubiquitous in clinical practice. Given the rich biomedical data captured for a large panel of patients, secondary analysis of these data for health research is also commonplace. Yet, there are many caveats to EHR data that the researchers must be aware of, such as the accuracy of and motive for documentation, and the reason for patients' visits to the clinic. The clinician-the author of the documentation-is thus central to the correct interpretation of EHR data for research purposes. In this study, I interviewed 11 physicians in various clinical specialties to bring attention to their view on the validity of research using EHR data. Qualitative, in-depth, one-on-one interviews were conducted with practicing physicians in inpatient and outpatient medicine. Content analysis using a data-driven, inductive approach to identify themes related to challenges and opportunities in the reuse of EHR data for secondary analysis generated seven themes. Themes that reflected challenges of EHRs for research included (1) audience, (2) accuracy of data, (3) availability of data, (4) documentation practices, and (5) representativeness. Themes that reflected opportunities of EHRs for research included (6) endorsement and (7) enablers. The greatest perceived barriers reflected the intended audience of the EHR, the interpretation and meaning of the data, and the quality of the data for research purposes. Physicians generally expressed more perceived challenges than opportunities in the reuse of EHR data for research purposes; however, they remained optimistic.</p>","PeriodicalId":48437,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Health Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Qualitative Study of Physicians' Views on the Reuse of Electronic Health Record Data for Secondary Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Neal D Goldstein\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10497323241245644\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Electronic health records (EHRs) have become ubiquitous in clinical practice. Given the rich biomedical data captured for a large panel of patients, secondary analysis of these data for health research is also commonplace. Yet, there are many caveats to EHR data that the researchers must be aware of, such as the accuracy of and motive for documentation, and the reason for patients' visits to the clinic. The clinician-the author of the documentation-is thus central to the correct interpretation of EHR data for research purposes. In this study, I interviewed 11 physicians in various clinical specialties to bring attention to their view on the validity of research using EHR data. Qualitative, in-depth, one-on-one interviews were conducted with practicing physicians in inpatient and outpatient medicine. Content analysis using a data-driven, inductive approach to identify themes related to challenges and opportunities in the reuse of EHR data for secondary analysis generated seven themes. Themes that reflected challenges of EHRs for research included (1) audience, (2) accuracy of data, (3) availability of data, (4) documentation practices, and (5) representativeness. Themes that reflected opportunities of EHRs for research included (6) endorsement and (7) enablers. The greatest perceived barriers reflected the intended audience of the EHR, the interpretation and meaning of the data, and the quality of the data for research purposes. Physicians generally expressed more perceived challenges than opportunities in the reuse of EHR data for research purposes; however, they remained optimistic.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48437,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Qualitative Health Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Qualitative Health Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10497323241245644\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qualitative Health Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10497323241245644","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
A Qualitative Study of Physicians' Views on the Reuse of Electronic Health Record Data for Secondary Analysis.
Electronic health records (EHRs) have become ubiquitous in clinical practice. Given the rich biomedical data captured for a large panel of patients, secondary analysis of these data for health research is also commonplace. Yet, there are many caveats to EHR data that the researchers must be aware of, such as the accuracy of and motive for documentation, and the reason for patients' visits to the clinic. The clinician-the author of the documentation-is thus central to the correct interpretation of EHR data for research purposes. In this study, I interviewed 11 physicians in various clinical specialties to bring attention to their view on the validity of research using EHR data. Qualitative, in-depth, one-on-one interviews were conducted with practicing physicians in inpatient and outpatient medicine. Content analysis using a data-driven, inductive approach to identify themes related to challenges and opportunities in the reuse of EHR data for secondary analysis generated seven themes. Themes that reflected challenges of EHRs for research included (1) audience, (2) accuracy of data, (3) availability of data, (4) documentation practices, and (5) representativeness. Themes that reflected opportunities of EHRs for research included (6) endorsement and (7) enablers. The greatest perceived barriers reflected the intended audience of the EHR, the interpretation and meaning of the data, and the quality of the data for research purposes. Physicians generally expressed more perceived challenges than opportunities in the reuse of EHR data for research purposes; however, they remained optimistic.
期刊介绍:
QUALITATIVE HEALTH RESEARCH is an international, interdisciplinary, refereed journal for the enhancement of health care and to further the development and understanding of qualitative research methods in health care settings. We welcome manuscripts in the following areas: the description and analysis of the illness experience, health and health-seeking behaviors, the experiences of caregivers, the sociocultural organization of health care, health care policy, and related topics. We also seek critical reviews and commentaries addressing conceptual, theoretical, methodological, and ethical issues pertaining to qualitative enquiry.