(1/156) Development and implementation of a clinician reporting system for advanced stage cancer: initial lessons learned.
(2/156) A patient-centric taxonomy for personal health records (PHRs).
Today, the nascent field of personal health records (PHRs) lacks a comprehensive taxonomy that encompasses the full range of PHRs currently in existence and what may be possible. The Center for Information Technology Leadership (CITL) has created a taxonomy that broadly defines a PHR as having both an infrastructure component, which allows for data viewing and sharing, and an application component, allowing for self-management and information exchange. The taxonomy also accounts for different PHR architectures provider, payer, third-party, or interoperable. This comprehensive taxonomy may help to define the field of PHRs and provide a framework for assessing PHR value. (+info)
(3/156) Design and implementation of a personal medication record-MyMedicationList.
A record of current medications as well as prior medication history is useful if not vital information to an individual. Such information needs to be easily accessible, yet adequately protected. MyMedicationList is a prototype application developed at the National Library of Medicine that helps users manage their medication lists and make the records readily available when needed. This personal medication list can be printed out and serve as a reminder to the individual for taking medications, or as reference information to support continuity of care at doctors offices or hospitals. This paper presents the design and implementation of MyMedicationList. As the personal medication record is considered a specialized Personal Health Record (PHR), the experience may be applied to general PHR design and implementation. An early version of MyMedicationList is available at http://mml.nlm.nih.gov/. (+info)
(4/156) The value of personal health record (PHR) systems.
Personal health records (PHRs) are a rapidly growing area of health information technology despite a lack of significant value-based assessment.Here we present an assessment of the potential value of PHR systems, looking at both costs and benefits.We examine provider-tethered, payer-tethered, and third-party PHRs, as well as idealized interoperable PHRs. An analytical model was developed that considered eight PHR application and infrastructure functions. Our analysis projects the initial and annual costs and annual benefits of PHRs to the entire US over the next 10 years.This PHR analysis shows that all forms of PHRs have initial net negative value. However, at the end of 10 years, steady state annual net value ranging from$13 billion to -$29 billion. Interoperable PHRs provide the most value, followed by third-party PHRs and payer-tethered PHRs also showing positive net value. Provider-tethered PHRs constantly demonstrating negative net value. (+info)
(5/156) What it takes: characteristics of the ideal personal health record.
(6/156) Information gap: can health insurer personal health records meet patients' and physicians' needs?
(7/156) Personal health management systems: applying the full power of software to improve the quality and efficiency of care.
(8/156) Privacy as an enabler, not an impediment: building trust into health information exchange.