Meeting the information and budgetary requirements of primary care groups   Commentary: Accurate information may be difficult to produce

Gilley, Judy; Majeed, Azeem

doi:10.1136/bmj.318.7177.168

Cited by 9 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…3,4 Although CIS are increasingly being used for coding, the data collected are still not likely to meet the forecasted information needs for the implementation of the integrated care record service (ICRS). 5,6 Clinical governance and the promotion of evidencebased medicine predict the need for information technology to play a central role in care standardisation. These agendas in combination with the NSFs and integrated care plans represent increasingly visible pressures for change in the modern world of primary care with its public health viewpoints.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Three steps to data quality

Thiru¹,

Lusignan²,

Sullivan³

et al. 2003

Journal of Innovation in Health Informatics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The quality of data in general practice clinical information systems varies enormously. This variability jeopardises the proposed national strategy for an integrated care records service and the capacity of primary care organisations to respond coherently to the demands of clinical governance and the proposed quality-based general practice contract. This is apparent in the difficulty in automating the audit process and in comparing aggregated data from different practices. In an attempt to provide data of adequate quality to support such operational needs, increasing emphasis is being placed on the standardisation of data recording. Objective To develop a conceptual framework to facilitate the recording of standardised data within primary care. Method A multiprofessional group of primary care members from the South Thames Research Network examined leading guidelines for best practice. Using the nominal group technique the group prioritised the information needs of primary care organisations for managing coronary heart disease according to current evidence. Results Information needs identified were prioritised and stratified into a functional framework. Conclusion It has been possible within the context of a primary care research network to produce a framework for standardising data collection. Motivation of front-line clinicians was achieved through the incorporation of their views into the synthesis of the dataset.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%