Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 3, 2026
The Participant-Reported Implementation Update and Score (PRIUS): A Novel Method for Capturing Implementation-Related Data Over Time
Published on: February 19, 2021
Systematic prioritization of the STARE-HI reporting items. An application to short conference papers on health
N F de Keizer1, J Talmon, E Ammenwerth
1Academic Medical Center, Department of Medical Informatics, J1b-115, P.O. Box 22700, 1100 DE Amsterdam, The Netherlands. n.f.keizer@amc.uva.nl
Background:
We previously devised and published a guideline for reporting health informatics evaluation studies named STARE-HI, which is formally endorsed by IMIA and EFMI.
Objective:
To develop a prioritization framework of ranked reporting items to assist authors when reporting health informatics evaluation studies in space restricted conference papers and to apply this prioritization framework to measure the quality of recent health informatics conference papers on evaluation studies.
Method:
We deconstructed the STARE-HI guideline to identify reporting items. We invited a total of 111 authors of health informatics evaluation studies, reviewers and editors of health Informatics conference proceedings to score those reporting items on a scale ranging from "0 - not necessary in a conference paper" through to "10 - essential in a conference paper" by a web-based survey. From the responses we derived a mean priority score. All evaluation papers published in proceedings of MIE2006, Medinfo2007, MIE2008 and AMIA2008 were rated on these items by two reviewers. From these ratings a priority adjusted completeness score was computed for each paper.
Results:
We identified 104 reporting items from the STARE-HI guideline. The response rate for the survey was 59% (66 out of 111). The most important reporting items (mean score ≥9) were "Interpret the data and give an answer to the study question - (in Discussion)", "Whether it is a laboratory, simulation or field study - (in Methods-study design)" and "Description of the outcome measure/evaluation criteria - (in Methods-study design)". Per reporting area the statistically more significant important reporting items were distinguished from less important ones. Four reporting items had a mean score ≤6. The mean priority adjusted completeness of evaluation papers of recent health informatics conferences was 48% (range 14-78%).
Conclusion:
We produced a ranked list of reporting items from STARE-HI according to their prioritized relevance for inclusion in space-limited conference papers. The priority adjusted completeness scores demonstrated room for improvement for the analyzed conference papers. We believe that this prioritization framework is an aid to improving the quality and utility of conference papers on health informatics evaluation studies.
Related Concept Videos
01:30Health Information Technology and Healthcare Information System
Health Information Technology, commonly called HIT, integrates advanced information systems and technology in healthcare settings. Its primary functions include:
01:26Methods Of Healthcare Delivery System
Managed Care System:
The managed care system is designed to control the cost while maintaining the quality of care. The patient's care from admission to discharge is planned by the primary care provider or the case manager, also known as the gatekeeper. In a managed care system, the number of care providers is limited...
01:21Types of Reports II: Incident or Occurrence Report
Purposes:
In the healthcare industry, reports play a crucial role in documenting incidents within an agency. The primary objective of these reports is to ensure patient safety, uphold the...
01:29Issues And Trends In Healthcare Delivery System
Cost Containment
Payment for healthcare services has historically promoted adoption of costly and often unnecessary or inefficient...
01:26Types of Reports III: Telephone and Verbal Reports
Here's an overview of each type:
Telephone Orders
01:12Statistical Software for Data Analysis and Clinical Trials