1. 1. Survey o Research questions o Is theory important in health informatics? o If so, what sources should a review consider? o Target population o UK HI academic community (est. 75-100) o Survey administered by web, Aug-Sept 2009 o 5-point Likert scale on 17 questions, plus free text o 46 responses received, 25 from target population Slide 1 of 5

2. 1. Survey o General support for need for theory from both academics and practitioners o General acceptance that HI has little theory and is immature as a discipline o Disagreement that theory is irrelevant o Strong disagreement that theory from other domains is sufficient for HI o No strong views about best sources, except marked disagreement that government strategy is of any value Slide 2 of 5

3. 2. International collaboration o Several survey respondents expressed interest in the research topic: systematic review of HI theory o Subsequent discussions led to collaboration with: o Professor Jeremy Wyatt, University of Warwick o Dr Andrew Georgiou, University of Sydney, Australia o Dr Sue Whetton, University of Tasmania, Australia o So far not funded, but bid made to SDO (DoH) and forthcoming bid to University of Sydney o Planning meta-narrative review (Greenhalgh et al, 2005) o Examine “genres” of theory, their discourse and evolution o Exploring possibility of PhD student to work on this Slide 3 of 5

4. 3. UK Faculty of Health Informatics o Awarded grant to: o Identify and report at least two specific examples of the practical benefit of informatics in various domains of health and social care in the UK; o Make recommendations about how the informatics evidence base can be improved in content and disseminated more widely and effectively. o Examples located from literature and email call for case studies o Recommendations for HI evidence base drew upon PhD work and formative work of collaborative review group, arguing for theory-building approach supported by Greenhalgh (2009) Slide 4 of 5

5. 3. UK Faculty of Health Informatics Slide 5 of 5