3. STARE-HI - Guidelines for authors of IT evaluation studies a) Why STARE-HI (Jan Talmon) b) STARE-HI: Guidelines for authors

Motivation Good reports will be referenced Good reports have influence on the standing of the journal (IF) IJMI welcomes papers that evaluate HI in a clinical setting

Current Situation Variability in reporting Nearly all papers fall short on a few accounts Studies may be valid, but papers often raise more questions then being answered by the study

Main problems Status of system unclear Functionality of system unclear No account for sample size (power) Poor motivation for study design and methods chosen Poor discussion, no critical attitude Not clear what lessons are learnt

3. STARE-HI - Guidelines for authors of IT evaluation studies a) Why STARE-HI b) STARE-HI: Guidelines for authors

Aim of STARE-HI STARE-HI = Standards for Reporting of Evaluation Studies in Health Informatics Provide guidelines on how to write an IT evaluation paper (a paper reporting on an IT evaluation study). To support Authors when writing a paper Reviewers and editors when assessing a paper

Development of STARE-HI (1/3) Only adaption of CONOSRT or comparable guidelines for RCT? Not really a solution, because There is more than RCT Socio-technical assessment Qualitative studies Specific issues of health informatics evaluaiton studies

Development of STARE-HI (2/3) Input for STARE-HI draft: Other recommendations such as CONSORT (RCT papers), STARD (studies of diagnostic accuracy), INAHTA (HTA reports), QUORUM (meta-analysis) etc. Own experiences as authors, reviewers and editors

Development of STARE-HI (3/3) Writing team of IT evaluation experts EFMI WG IMIA WG AMIA WG

Structure STARE-HI Describes items that should be contained in the various sections of an IT evaluation paper Title and Abstract Introduction Method Results Discussion Conclusion

Content of STARE-HI 1. Title 2. Abstract 3. Keywords 4. Conflict of Interest 5. Introduction –5.1 Scientific background –5.2 Rationale for the study –5.3 Ojectives of the study 6. Study context –6.1 System details –6.2 Location –6.2 Study constraints, conditions and context 7. Method and material –7.1 Study design/method description –7.2 Frame of reference –7.3 Participants 7. Method and material (cont) –7.4 Study duration –7.5 Outcome –7.6 Data acquisition –7.7 Data analysis 8. Results –8.1Baseline data –8.2 Study flow –8.3 Unexpected events –8.4 Outcome data 9. Discussion –9.1 Discussion of Findings –9.2 Discussion of Methods 10. Conclusion 11. References 12. Appendices

How to proceed Discussion at MIE2006 Revision 1 Discussion through EFMI-WG/IMIA-WG website Revision 2 Discussion at AMIA2006 Solicit comments of editors of MI and general medicine journals Revision 3 Final round for comments Final version Submission to MI and general medicine journals