IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v22y2002i6p514-521.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Information in Medical Decision Making: How Consistent Is Our Management?

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel P. Lorence

    (Department of Health Policy and Administration, Pennsylvania State University)

  • Amanda Spink

    (School of Information Sciences &! Technology, Pennsylvania State University)

  • Robert Jameson

    (CDS Research, Chicago)

Abstract

Background . The use of outcomes data in clinical environments requires a correspondingly greater variety of information used in decision making, the measurement of quality, and clinical performance. As information becomes integral in the decision-making process, trustworthy decision support data are required. Methods . Using data from a national census of certified health information managers, variation in automated data quality management practices was examined. Results . Relatively low overall adoption of automated data management exists in health care organizations, with significant geographic and practice setting variation. Nonuniform regional adoption of computerized data management exists, despite national mandates that promote and in some cases require uniform adoption. Overall, a significant number of respondents (42.7%) indicated that they had not adopted policies and procedures to direct the timeliness of data capture, with 57.3% having adopted such practices. Conclusions . The inconsistency of patient data policy suggests that provider organizations do not use uniform information management methods, despite growing federal mandates to do so.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel P. Lorence & Amanda Spink & Robert Jameson, 2002. "Information in Medical Decision Making: How Consistent Is Our Management?," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 22(6), pages 514-521, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:22:y:2002:i:6:p:514-521
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X02238295
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X02238295
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X02238295?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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:sae:medema:v:22:y:2002:i:6:p:514-521. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.