STARE-HI - Statement on Reporting of Evaluation Studies in Health Informatics Explanation and Elaboration
STARE-HI - Statement on Reporting of Evaluation Studies in Health Informatics Explanation and Elaboration
复制标题
DOI：
10.4338/aci-2013-04-ra-0024
复制
发表时间：
2013-01-01
影响因子：
2.9
通讯作者：
Ammenwerth, E.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Brender, J.;Talmon, J.;Ammenwerth, E.
背景资料：提高卫生信息学评价研究报告的质量是实现循证卫生信息学愿景的一项重要要求。2009年出版的STARE-HI --关于卫生信息学评价研究报告的声明，提供了评价研究报告中应包含的要素的指导方针。目标：详细阐述STARE-HI的原则并提供其基本原理，通过提供报告的解释性示例，指导卫生信息学评价研究的作者和读者。一组方法学家，研究人员和编辑准备了STARE-HI声明的阐述和从文献中选择的例子。结果：在描述卫生信息学干预措施的评估论文中要解决的35个STARE-HI项目被逐一讨论，每个项目都有例子和阐述。结论：STARE-HI声明和这份详细说明文件应成为改进定量和定性评价研究报告的有用资源。评价手稿坚持的原则，使读者的这些文件，以更好地把研究在一个适当的背景下，判断其有效性和普遍性，从而反过来优化利用的证据inherent.Limitations：本文是基于一组编辑，审稿人，作者的系统评价和读者的科学文献的经验。这些原则的细节的适用性必须随着其在实践中的使用而变化。
Background: Improving the quality of reporting of evaluation studies in health informatics is an important requirement towards the vision of evidence-based health informatics. The STARE-HI -Statement on Reporting of Evaluation Studies in health informatics, published in 2009, provides guidelines on the elements to be contained in an evaluation study report.Objectives: To elaborate on and provide a rationale for the principles of STARE-HI and to guide authors and readers of evaluation studies in health informatics by providing explanatory examples of reporting.Methods: A group of methodologists, researchers and editors prepared the present elaboration of the STARE-HI statement and selected examples from the literature.Results: The 35 STARE-HI items to be addressed in evaluation papers describing health informatics interventions are discussed one by one and each is extended with examples and elaborations.Conclusion: The STARE-HI statement and this elaboration document should be helpful resources to improve reporting of both quantitative and qualitative evaluation studies. Evaluation manuscripts adhering to the principles will enable readers of such papers to better place the studies in a proper context and judge their validity and generalizability, and thus in turn optimize the exploitation of the evidence contained therein.Limitations: This paper is based on experiences of a group of editors, reviewers, authors of systematic reviews and readers of the scientific literature. The applicability of the details of these principles has to evolve as a function of their use in practice.