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
. 2023 Nov 6;13(11):e075009.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-075009.

How digital health translational research is prioritised: a qualitative stakeholder-driven approach to decision support evaluation

Affiliations

How digital health translational research is prioritised: a qualitative stakeholder-driven approach to decision support evaluation

Adeola Bamgboje-Ayodele et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Objectives: Digital health is now routinely being applied in clinical care, and with a variety of clinician-facing systems available, healthcare organisations are increasingly required to make decisions about technology implementation and evaluation. However, few studies have examined how digital health research is prioritised, particularly research focused on clinician-facing decision support systems. This study aimed to identify criteria for prioritising digital health research, examine how these differ from criteria for prioritising traditional health research and determine priority decision support use cases for a collaborative implementation research programme.

Methods: Drawing on an interpretive listening model for priority setting and a stakeholder-driven approach, our prioritisation process involved stakeholder identification, eliciting decision support use case priorities from stakeholders, generating initial use case priorities and finalising preferred use cases based on consultations. In this qualitative study, online focus group session(s) were held with stakeholders, audiorecorded, transcribed and analysed thematically.

Results: Fifteen participants attended the online priority setting sessions. Criteria for prioritising digital health research fell into three themes, namely: public health benefit, health system-level factors and research process and feasibility. We identified criteria unique to digital health research as the availability of suitable governance frameworks, candidate technology's alignment with other technologies in use,and the possibility of data-driven insights from health technology data. The final selected use cases were remote monitoring of patients with pulmonary conditions, sepsis detection and automated breast screening.

Conclusion: The criteria for determining digital health research priority areas are more nuanced than that of traditional health condition focused research and can neither be viewed solely through a clinical lens nor technological lens. As digital health research relies heavily on health technology implementation, digital health prioritisation criteria comprised enablers of successful technology implementation. Our prioritisation process could be applied to other settings and collaborative projects where research institutions partner with healthcare delivery organisations.

Keywords: Health informatics; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; Quality in health care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: Malcolm Pradhan was an employee at the time the study was conducted and has financial interest of Alcidion Corporation Pty Ltd.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Initial use cases identified by stakeholders.

References

    1. Mathews SC, McShea MJ, Hanley CL, et al. . Digital health: a path to validation. NPJ Digit Med 2019;2:38. 10.1038/s41746-019-0111-3 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Osheroff JA, Teich JM, Levick D. Improving outcomes with clinical decision support: an implementer’s guide. Himss Publishing, 2012. 10.4324/9781498757461 - DOI
    1. Belard A, Buchman T, Forsberg J, et al. . Precision diagnosis: a view of the clinical decision support systems (CDSS) landscape through the lens of critical care. J Clin Monit Comput 2017;31:261–71. 10.1007/s10877-016-9849-1 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sutton RT, Pincock D, Baumgart DC, et al. . An overview of clinical decision support systems: benefits, risks, and strategies for success. NPJ Digit Med 2020;3:17. 10.1038/s41746-020-0221-y - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Van Dort BA, Zheng WY, Baysari MT. Prescriber perceptions of medication-related computerized decision support systems in hospitals: a synthesis of qualitative research. Int J Med Inform 2019;129:285–95. 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2019.06.024 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types