Suzanne Bakken1, Cornelia M Ruland. 1. School of Nursing, Department of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, 630 W. 168 Street, Mail Box 6, New York, NY 10032, USA. suzanne.bakken@dbmi.columbia.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Clinical informatics intervention research suffers from a lack of attention to external validity in study design, implementation, evaluation, and reporting. This hampers the ability of others to assess the fit of a clinical informatics intervention with demonstrated efficacy in one setting for implementation in their setting. The objective of this model formulation paper is to demonstrate the applicability of the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance) framework with proposed extensions to clinical informatics intervention research and describe the framework's role in facilitating the translation of evidence into practice and generation of evidence from practice. Both aspects are essential to reap the clinical and public health benefits of clinical informatics research. DESIGN: We expanded RE-AIM through the addition of assessment questions relevant to clinical informatics intervention research including those related to predisposing, enabling, and reinforcing factors and validated it with two case studies. RESULTS: The first case study supported the applicability of RE-AIM to inform real world implementation of a clinical informatics intervention with demonstrated efficacy in randomized controlled trials (RCTs)--the Choice (Creating better Health Outcomes by Improving Communication about Patients' Experiences) intervention. The second, an RCT of a personal digital assistant-based decision support system for guideline-based care, illustrated how RE-AIM can be used to inform the design of an efficacy RCT that captures essential contextual details typically lacking in RCT design and reporting. CONCLUSION: The case studies validate, through example, the applicability of RE-AIM to inform the design, implementation, evaluation, and reporting of clinical informatics intervention studies.
OBJECTIVE: Clinical informatics intervention research suffers from a lack of attention to external validity in study design, implementation, evaluation, and reporting. This hampers the ability of others to assess the fit of a clinical informatics intervention with demonstrated efficacy in one setting for implementation in their setting. The objective of this model formulation paper is to demonstrate the applicability of the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance) framework with proposed extensions to clinical informatics intervention research and describe the framework's role in facilitating the translation of evidence into practice and generation of evidence from practice. Both aspects are essential to reap the clinical and public health benefits of clinical informatics research. DESIGN: We expanded RE-AIM through the addition of assessment questions relevant to clinical informatics intervention research including those related to predisposing, enabling, and reinforcing factors and validated it with two case studies. RESULTS: The first case study supported the applicability of RE-AIM to inform real world implementation of a clinical informatics intervention with demonstrated efficacy in randomized controlled trials (RCTs)--the Choice (Creating better Health Outcomes by Improving Communication about Patients' Experiences) intervention. The second, an RCT of a personal digital assistant-based decision support system for guideline-based care, illustrated how RE-AIM can be used to inform the design of an efficacy RCT that captures essential contextual details typically lacking in RCT design and reporting. CONCLUSION: The case studies validate, through example, the applicability of RE-AIM to inform the design, implementation, evaluation, and reporting of clinical informatics intervention studies.
Authors: Peter P Roy-Byrne; Cathy D Sherbourne; Michelle G Craske; Murray B Stein; Wayne Katon; Greer Sullivan; Adrienne Means-Christensen; Alexander Bystritsky Journal: Psychiatr Serv Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 3.084
Authors: Russell E Glasgow; Lawrence W Green; Lisa M Klesges; David B Abrams; Edwin B Fisher; Michael G Goldstein; Laura L Hayman; Judith K Ockene; C Tracy Orleans Journal: Ann Behav Med Date: 2006-04
Authors: W W Stead; R B Haynes; S Fuller; C P Friedman; L E Travis; J R Beck; C H Fenichel; B Chandrasekaran; B G Buchanan; E E Abola Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 1994 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Margaret Holmes-Rovner; Diane Valade; Catherine Orlowski; Catherine Draus; Barbara Nabozny-Valerio; Susan Keiser Journal: Health Expect Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 3.377
Authors: Bernardine M Pinto; Robert Friedman; Bess H Marcus; Heather Kelley; Sharon Tennstedt; Matthew W Gillman Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2002-08 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Nancy S Sung; William F Crowley; Myron Genel; Patricia Salber; Lewis Sandy; Louis M Sherwood; Stephen B Johnson; Veronica Catanese; Hugh Tilson; Kenneth Getz; Elaine L Larson; David Scheinberg; E Albert Reece; Harold Slavkin; Adrian Dobs; Jack Grebb; Rick A Martinez; Allan Korn; David Rimoin Journal: JAMA Date: 2003-03-12 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: George L Jackson; Sarah L Krein; Dale C Alverson; Adam W Darkins; William Gunnar; Nancy D Harada; Christian D Helfrich; Thomas K Houston; Thomas F Klobucar; Kim M Nazi; Ronald K Poropatich; James D Ralston; Hayden B Bosworth Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2011-11 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Jeffrey C Eisen; Monika Marko-Holguin; Joshua Fogel; Alonso Cardenas; My Bahn; Nathan Bradford; Blake Fagan; Peggy Wiedmann; Benjamin W Van Voorhees Journal: Prim Care Companion CNS Disord Date: 2013-12-19
Authors: Nicole Dancy-Scott; Maxine L Rockoff; Gale A Dutcher; Alla Keselman; Rebecca Schnall; Elliot R Siegel; Suzanne Bakken Journal: Inf Serv Use Date: 2014