Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Sep 25;17(1):139.
doi: 10.1186/s12911-017-0538-x.

Factors influencing the development of primary care data collection projects from electronic health records: a systematic review of the literature

Marie-Line Gentil  1   2 , Marc Cuggia  3   4   5   6 , Laure Fiquet  7   8 , Camille Hagenbourger  7 , Thomas Le Berre  7 , Agnès Banâtre  7   8 , Eric Renault  4 , Guillaume Bouzille  3   4   5   6 , Anthony Chapron  7   8
Affiliations

Factors influencing the development of primary care data collection projects from electronic health records: a systematic review of the literature

Marie-Line Gentil et al. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. .

Abstract

Background: Primary care data gathered from Electronic Health Records are of the utmost interest considering the essential role of general practitioners (GPs) as coordinators of patient care. These data represent the synthesis of the patient history and also give a comprehensive picture of the population health status. Nevertheless, discrepancies between countries exist concerning routine data collection projects. Therefore, we wanted to identify elements that influence the development and durability of such projects.

Methods: A systematic review was conducted using the PubMed database to identify worldwide current primary care data collection projects. The gray literature was also searched via official project websites and their contact person was emailed to obtain information on the project managers. Data were retrieved from the included studies using a standardized form, screening four aspects: projects features, technological infrastructure, GPs' roles, data collection network organization.

Results: The literature search allowed identifying 36 routine data collection networks, mostly in English-speaking countries: CPRD and THIN in the United Kingdom, the Veterans Health Administration project in the United States, EMRALD and CPCSSN in Canada. These projects had in common the use of technical facilities that range from extraction tools to comprehensive computing platforms. Moreover, GPs initiated the extraction process and benefited from incentives for their participation. Finally, analysis of the literature data highlighted that governmental services, academic institutions, including departments of general practice, and software companies, are pivotal for the promotion and durability of primary care data collection projects.

Conclusion: Solid technical facilities and strong academic and governmental support are required for promoting and supporting long-term and wide-range primary care data collection projects.

Keywords: Data collection; Data mining; Electronic health records; Governance; Primary care; Secondary use; Stakeholders.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
PubMed query
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Form used to analyze the selected primary care data collection projects and relevant websites
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Article selection flow chart
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Number of publications per database. Projects with at least two publications retrieved by our query
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Chart representing the percentage of publications per country
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Representativeness of population in projects. Projects collecting data on more than one percent of the country population
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Elkin PL, Trusko BE, Koppel R, Speroff T, Mohrer D, Sakji S, et al. Secondary use of clinical data. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2010;155:14–29. - PubMed
    1. Cuggia M, Garcelon N, Campillo-Gimenez B, Bernicot T, Laurent J-F, Garin E, et al. Roogle: an information retrieval engine for clinical data warehouse. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2011;169:584–588. - PubMed
    1. Metzger M-H, Durand T, Lallich S, Salamon R, Castets P. The use of regional platforms for managing electronic health records for the production of regional public health indicators in France. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2012;12:28. doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-12-28. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. De Moor G, Sundgren M, Kalra D, Schmidt A, Dugas M, Claerhout B, et al. Using electronic health records for clinical research: the case of the EHR4CR project. J Biomed Inform. 2015;53:162–173. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2014.10.006. - DOI - PubMed
    1. de Lusignan S, van Weel C. The use of routinely collected computer data for research in primary care: opportunities and challenges. Fam Pract. 2006;23:253–263. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmi106. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources