IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jomega/v22y1994i5p491-504.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Experience with a structure, process and outcome framework for evaluating an information system

Author

Listed:
  • Cornford, T
  • Doukidis, Gi
  • Forster, D

Abstract

There are a number of problems in assessing the quality and performance of any information system, but these are particularly acute when it is intended for use within a developing country environment. This paper presents the case for structured evaluation of such systems, based on experience with a medical decision-aid system for developing countries. The paper provides a framework to approach the evaluation task combining work in the area of information systems and health policy analysis. The model used is built around the three concepts of a system's structure, the process it supports and the outcome of its use. This three-part analysis is then applied at three main levels: that of the system's functioning, human and user perspectives and the overall impact of the system, in this case the impact on the health care system.

Suggested Citation

  • Cornford, T & Doukidis, Gi & Forster, D, 1994. "Experience with a structure, process and outcome framework for evaluating an information system," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 22(5), pages 491-504, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:22:y:1994:i:5:p:491-504
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0305-0483(94)90030-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Iannacci, Federico & Cornford, Tony, 2017. "Unravelling casual and temporal influences underpinning monitoring systems success: a typological approach," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 84049, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Arnold Reisman & Muhittin Oral, 2005. "Soft Systems Methodology: A Context Within a 50-Year Retrospective of OR/MS," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 35(2), pages 164-178, April.
    3. Davies, John Kenneth & Sherriff, Nigel, 2011. "The gradient in health inequalities among families and children: A review of evaluation frameworks," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(1), pages 1-10, June.
    4. Federico Iannacci & Tony Cornford & Antonio Cordella & Francesco Grillo, 2009. "Evaluating Monitoring Systems in the European Social Fund Context," Evaluation Review, , vol. 33(5), pages 419-445, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:22:y:1994:i:5:p:491-504. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/375/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.