Learning health systems

Last updated

Learning health systems (LHS) are health and healthcare systems in which knowledge generation processes are embedded in daily practice to improve individual and population health. At its most fundamental level, a learning health system applies a conceptual approach wherein science, informatics, incentives, and culture are aligned to support continuous improvement, innovation, and equity, and seamlessly embed knowledge and best practices into care delivery [1] [2] [3]

Contents

The idea was first conceptualized in a 2006 workshop organized by the US Institute of Medicine (now the National Academy of Medicine (NAM)), building on ideas around evidence-based medicine [1] and "practice-based evidence". [4] and around recognition of the persistent gap between evidence generated in the context of biomedical research and the application of that evidence in the provision of care. The need to close this gap was further underscored by the growth of electronic health records (EHR) and other innovations in health information technology and computational power, and the resulting ability to generate data that can lead to better evidence and better outcomes. There has since been increasing interest in the topic, including the creation of the Wiley journal Learning Health Systems. [3]

Cornerstone elements of the LHS include:

  1. generation, application, and improvement of scientific knowledge;
  2. an organizational infrastructure that supports the engagement of communities of patients, healthcare professionals and researchers who collaborate to identify evidence gaps that could be addressed through research in routine healthcare settings; [5]
  3. deployment of computational technologies and informatics approaches that organize and leverage large electronic health data sets, i.e. "big data" for use in research;
  4. quality improvement at the point of care for each patient using new knowledge generated by research.

Other compatible ways of describing the LHS co-exist alongside the NAM definition, including the definition used by AHRQ, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. AHRQ defines a learning health system as "a health system in which internal data and experience are systematically integrated with external evidence, and that knowledge is put into practice. As a result, patients get higher quality, safer, more efficient care, and health care delivery organizations become better places to work.”

In 2023, the NAM established ten core principles of learning health organizations to serve as a unifying touchstone for the field.[ citation needed ] The principles reflect and build upon the six aims of the seminal "Crossing the Quality Chasm" report published in 2001 (safe, equitable, effective, efficient, timely, and patient-centered), [6] and account for the ways in which health care has evolved since the publication of this 2001 report.

History

The NAM’s early efforts to develop the ideas underpinning the LHS began in 2006, via a series of workshops held over several years from 2006-2013. Among several early publications to express the need for a rapid learning health system was a commentary in Health Affairs in 2007 [7] where Lynn Etheredge applied the term “rapid learning health system” in recognition of the opportunity to leverage electronic health records (EHR) to “learn” what works in health care. The series of NAM workshops generated several summary publications on topics under the mantle of the LHS, including publications focused on the digital infrastructure [2] as well as on ethical considerations. [8] In 2013, the workshops culminated in a seminal report, “Best Care at Lower Cost: the Path to Continuously Learning Health Care in America.” [9] Summarizing the heretofore efforts, McGinnis and colleagues enumerate key milestones in the evolution of the LHS that include these reports as well as decades-old efforts to generate evidence from routine health care delivery. [10]

Nomenclature may vary in reference to the LHS concept. Some refer to a learning healthcare system, others refer to learning health systems or collaborative learning health systems. [11] The architecture and objectives are similar, irrespective of the label—addressing evidence gaps, harnessing data, and effectively utilizing the best evidence at the point of need. Related concepts include the use of real-world data to generate real-world evidence, and mobilizing computable biomedical knowledge. [12]

Given that the LHS has an expansive definition and scope, many of the early adopters of this approach were health systems that also had embedded research capabilities, such as a formal department or institute. The Veterans Administration Health System, [13] Group Health Cooperative, [14] Kaiser Permanente [15] and Geisinger Health System [16] were among the vanguard organizations who also published insights from their experience of launching formal learning health system activities. Increasingly, academic health systems have taken up the principles and practices espoused by the earliest adopters.

Adoption and spread

Early experiences with deploying the LHS have been instructive and have led to further adoption and spread. The LHS model is being applied in specific medical specialties such as pediatrics [17] and oncology, [18] and further examination of the environment and conditions that support learning have spurred development of increasingly detailed and specialized frameworks [19] [20] [21] that can support further adoption and adaptation based on the needs, features, and capabilities of a particular health system.

Along with a growing body of peer-reviewed publications on the specific experience of different systems as they evolve toward continuous learning, review articles have been published to reflect on the growth of the LHS as a whole. A systematic review by Budrionis [22] observed that the ability to evaluate how well an LHS improves outcomes was not well-explored in the literature. Subsequently, Platt [23] examined progress of theories and implementation of the LHS, Nash focused a review on deployment of the LHS in primary care, [24] and Ellis mapped empirical applications of the LHS. [25] Easterling and colleagues (REF LHS 2022) proffer an elaborate taxonomy of LHS elements and use this to describe an LHS-IP, or “Learning Health System In Practice” as a model for health care systems who seek to become an LHS. [26]

The motivations for applying LHS concepts are largely and logically focused on improving the quality of care. Exemplar organizations are numerous and growing and include both community-based health systems and university-based academic health systems/medical centers in the United States:

In many cases, these institutions are engaged in research activities such as the HCSRN, Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA), and PCORnet where the LHS concepts are applied. The University of Michigan has also established a formal academic department, the Department of Learning Health Sciences. Alongside these exemplar organizations, related initiatives and consortia have been established in recent years. The Learning Health Community is an umbrella organization that has united many systems and health data organizations to develop shared principles and processes, and foster learning about the applications of technologies in the context of learning systems via a periodic virtual forum (LHS IT Forum). Given their centrality to the generation of health data and information, two of the largest EHR vendors have also created communities to support LHS: Cerner’s Learning Health Network and Epic System's Health Research Network. Still, much of the LHS development has been concentrated in large academic medical centers and health systems with a sizable footprint. Masica notes that nearly 85% of more than 6000 hospitals in the US are categorized as community hospitals, and the ability to develop and implement an LHS may be more challenging due to workforce and other constraints. [27]

Dissemination of the activities and experiences of learning health systems has been an instrumental aspect of their growth and spread.  While peer-reviewed literature on the LHS appears in a variety of journals, the creation of Healthcare: the Journal of Delivery Science and Innovation and the Learning Health Systems Journal are dedicated to manuscripts that showcase the experience of those deploying or refining aspects of learning in real-world practices. Each has also published special issues with thematic emphases on LHS-related topics such as embedded research and ethical, legal, and social implications of the LHS. Another marker of the spread of the LHS is its international adoption. Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom and other countries are applying the LHS concepts, offering opportunities to compare and contrast global experiences and develop a richer picture of how the local context, structure of care delivery, and regulatory environment affect the ability to support continuous learning. Patient involvement in the LHS has grown, partly due to the establishment of the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, continued emphasis on shared decision-making, and the growing recognition of participatory medicine. However, the engagement of patients is not consistent across health systems and there is not a uniform template for patient engagement or approaches to educating patients about the value and significance of the LHS as a model for improving evidence-based care.

Electronic health data as a central component to the LHS

A large proportion of LHS research relies on the use of electronic health records (EHRs) and must navigate the inherent challenges of EHRs. [28] EHRs were primarily created to support billing for clinical services and tracking health insurance claims. Generation of rich real-world clinical data is an essential "byproduct" of this highly transactional purpose of the contemporary EHR.

The LHS leverages a clinical lifecycle. Patient data is collected, which can then be amalgamated across multiple patients to identify, define, and analyze a problem or a gap in the application of evidence-based care. [29] These are activities largely driven by healthcare professionals. With the support of technology (both computational and statistical), an analysis of the amalgamated data can result in new evidence. Such knowledge generation can then spur changes in clinical practice, and thus to new patient data being collected. [3] [30] [31] This is the optimum for the LHS. However, dissemination of implementation of new evidence can be operationally and technically challenging in many settings, including the original health system that identified a problem based on their own clinical data.

McLachlan and colleagues (2018) suggest a taxonomy of nine LHS classification types: [3]

  1. Cohort identification looks for patients with similar attributes. [32]
  2. Positive deviance finds examples of better care against a benchmark. [33]
  3. Negative deviance finds examples of sub-optimal care. [30]
  4. Predictive patient risk modeling uses patterns in data to find groups at greater risk of adverse events. [34]
  5. Predictive care risk and outcome models identify situations that are at greater risk of poor care. [35]
  6. Clinical decision support systems use patient algorithms applied to patient data to make specific treatment recommendations.
  7. Comparative effectiveness research determines the most effective treatments. [35]
  8. Intelligent assistance use data to automate routine processes. [35]
  9. Surveillance monitors data for disease outbreaks or other treatment issues. [36]

Synergy with other disciplines

The LHS is a multidisciplinary and multi-stakeholder model for improvement, wherein clinical practitioners, health system leaders, data analysts and health IT experts, operations personnel, and researchers bring requisite expertise to bear throughout the cycle of improving health and healthcare. In a complex healthcare environment, sustained engagement of all health system stakeholders is necessary to successfully identify and prioritize evidence gaps, develop suitable interventions, analyze insights from the interventions, and deploy resulting changes. Hence, many disciplines and scientific domains may contribute various types of subspecialty expertise including:

Training

As the LHS has matured, leaders and vanguard organizations have identified the requisite skills needed to lead and develop interventions that support learning. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality convened a technical expert panel in 2016 to identify core competencies, which yielded 33 competencies spanning seven domains. [37] These competency domains are (1) Systems Science; (2) Research Questions and Standards of Scientific Evidence; (3) Research Methods; (4) Informatics; (5) Ethics of Research and Implementation in Health Systems; (6) Improvement and Implementation Science; (7) Engagement, Leadership, and Research Management. An 8th domain, Equity and Justice, was added in 2022 and a total of 38 competencies are now identified. These competencies form the backbone of a training program collaboratively funded by AHRQ and PCORI, two US funding agencies that also issue funding opportunities for LHS-related studies. A $40 million funding opportunity for mentored career development awards was issued in 2017 and 11 Centers of Excellence were awarded five years of federal funding in 2018 to support the training of clinician and research scientists to conduct patient-centered outcomes research within LHS. [38] [39]

The LHS Centers of Excellence funded in 2018 were: [40]

  1. A Chicago Center of Excellence in Learning Health Systems Research Training (ACCELERAT), Northwestern University, Chicago, Ill.
  2. CATALyST: Consortium for Applied Training to Advance the Learning Health System with Scholars/Trainees, Kaiser Permanente Washington Research Institute, Seattle, WA. [41]
  3. Learning Health System Scholar Program at Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tenn.
  4. Leveraging Infrastructure to Train Investigators in Patient-Centered Outcomes Research in Learning Health System (LITI- PCORLHS), Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Ind. [42]
  5. Minnesota Learning Health System Mentored Career Development Program (MN-LHS), University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota. [43]
  6. Northwest Center of Excellence & K12 in Patient Centered Learning Health Systems Science, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon. [44]
  7. PEDSnet Scholars: A Training Program for Pediatric Learning Health System Researchers, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA [45]
  8. Stakeholder-Partnered Implementation Research and Innovation Translation (SPIRIT) program, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California. [46]
  9. The Center of Excellence in Promoting LHS Operations and Research at Einstein/Montefiore (EXPLORE), Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, N.Y.
  10. Transforming the Generation and Adoption of PCOR into Practice (T-GAPP), University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
  11. University of California-San Francisco Learning Health System K12 Career Development Program, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California.

As the funding for the aforementioned Centers of Excellence concludes in 2023, a successor funding opportunity was created by AHRQ and PCORI to fund Learning Health System Embedded Scientist Training and Research (LHS E-STaR) Centers. Other similar training and fellowship programs have been offered by AcademyHealth via their Delivery System Science Fellowship program, Kaiser Permanente’s Division of Research, and the Veterans Administration via the Seattle-Denver Center of Innovation. Program offerings and emphases vary from institution to institution, but all involve training and professional development in topics related to improving health systems and the ability to generate and learn from evidence. Articles describing multidisciplinary workforce training efforts was published as a supplement to the LHS Journal in 2022, including an experience report summarizing the collective insights from the 11 initially funded Centers of Excellence.

Funding and financial support

Support for learning activities may be derived from federal, philanthropic, and other sources. Examples include the National Institutes of Health and AHRQ (federal); and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (philanthropic). The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) has designated the realization of a national learning health system as one of their five national priorities for health, which is indicative of future funding opportunities. Funding provided to personnel within an organization (i.e., a health system) may be designated for internally-directed learning activities with no expectation about developing and publishing generalizable results. In this way, learning health system may be distinguished from traditional health services or informatics research and more closely resemble the funding and infrastructure that health systems designate for quality improvement activities. In 2015, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) funded the Health Care Payment Learning and Action Network to ascertain what works with respect to alternative health care delivery arrangements, however, reimbursement for learning activities from insurers/payers is not currently a steady avenue for financial support to incentivize health system learning.

Ethical considerations

Bioethics scholars including Faden, Asch, Finkelstein, Morain, and Platt have averred that in a learning health system, consideration should be given to both clinical ethics and research ethics. Faden, Kass and colleagues have put forth an ethics framework for the learning health system that is anchored on seven essential obligations: (1) respecting dignity and rights of all patients; (2) respecting clinical judgment; (3) providing optimal care to every patient; (4) avoiding the introduction of non-clinical burdens and risks; (5) reducing health inequities; (6) ensuring responsible activities are conducted in a way that fosters learning; and (7) contributing to the overall aim of improving quality and value in health care. [47] This framework and several companion articles were published as a special report from the Hastings Center. Subsequent articles by Finkelstein et al, as well as Asch and colleagues seek to use examples of learning activities as a means to describe different approaches to research oversight and compliance. [48] [49] Rigorous deliberations about the approach to informed consent are also germane to the ethics of learning activities in the healthcare context.

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Health informatics</span> Computational approaches to health care

Health informatics is the study and implementation of computer structures and algorithms to improve communication, understanding, and management of medical information. It can be viewed as a branch of engineering and applied science.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Electronic health record</span> Digital collection of patient and population electronically stored health information

An electronic health record (EHR) is the systematized collection of patient and population electronically stored health information in a digital format. These records can be shared across different health care settings. Records are shared through network-connected, enterprise-wide information systems or other information networks and exchanges. EHRs may include a range of data, including demographics, medical history, medication and allergies, immunization status, laboratory test results, radiology images, vital signs, personal statistics like age and weight, and billing information.

A clinical decision support system (CDSS) is a health information technology that provides clinicians, staff, patients, and other individuals with knowledge and person-specific information to help health and health care. CDSS encompasses a variety of tools to enhance decision-making in the clinical workflow. These tools include computerized alerts and reminders to care providers and patients, clinical guidelines, condition-specific order sets, focused patient data reports and summaries, documentation templates, diagnostic support, and contextually relevant reference information, among other tools. CDSSs constitute a major topic in artificial intelligence in medicine.

Patient safety is a discipline that emphasizes safety in health care through the prevention, reduction, reporting and analysis of error and other types of unnecessary harm that often lead to adverse patient events. The frequency and magnitude of avoidable adverse events, often known as patient safety incidents, experienced by patients was not well known until the 1990s, when multiple countries reported significant numbers of patients harmed and killed by medical errors. Recognizing that healthcare errors impact 1 in every 10 patients around the world, the World Health Organization (WHO) calls patient safety an endemic concern. Indeed, patient safety has emerged as a distinct healthcare discipline supported by an immature yet developing scientific framework. There is a significant transdisciplinary body of theoretical and research literature that informs the science of patient safety with mobile health apps being a growing area of research.

A patient safety organization (PSO) is a group, institution, or association that improves medical care by reducing medical errors. Common functions of patient safety organizations are data collection, analysis, reporting, education, funding, and advocacy. A PSO differs from a Federally designed Patient Safety Organization (PSO), which provides health care providers in the U.S. privilege and confidentiality protections for efforts to improve patient safety and the quality of patient care delivery

Health services research (HSR) became a burgeoning field in North America in the 1960s, when scientific information and policy deliberation began to coalesce. Sometimes also referred to as health systems research or health policy and systems research (HPSR), HSR is a multidisciplinary scientific field that examines how people get access to health care practitioners and health care services, how much care costs, and what happens to patients as a result of this care. HSR utilizes all qualitative and quantitative methods across the board to ask questions of the healthcare system. It focuses on performance, quality, effectiveness and efficiency of health care services as they relate to health problems of individuals and populations, as well as health care systems and addresses wide-ranging topics of structure, processes, and organization of health care services; their use and people's access to services; efficiency and effectiveness of health care services; the quality of healthcare services and its relationship to health status, and; the uses of medical knowledge.

Health information technology (HIT) is health technology, particularly information technology, applied to health and health care. It supports health information management across computerized systems and the secure exchange of health information between consumers, providers, payers, and quality monitors. Based on a 2008 report on a small series of studies conducted at four sites that provide ambulatory care – three U.S. medical centers and one in the Netherlands, the use of electronic health records (EHRs) was viewed as the most promising tool for improving the overall quality, safety and efficiency of the health delivery system.

Comparative effectiveness research (CER) is the direct comparison of existing health care interventions to determine which work best for which patients and which pose the greatest benefits and harms. The core question of comparative effectiveness research is which treatment works best, for whom, and under what circumstances. Engaging various stakeholders in this process, while difficult, makes research more applicable through providing information that improves patient decision making.

Patient participation is a trend that arose in answer to medical paternalism. Informed consent is a process where patients make decisions informed by the advice of medical professionals.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute</span> Health research organization

The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) is a United States–based non-profit institute created through the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. It is a government-sponsored organization charged with funding Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) that assists consumers, clinicians, purchasers, and policymakers to make informed decisions intended to improve health care at both the individual and population levels, according to the Institute of Medicine. Medicare considers the Institute's research in determining what sorts of therapies it will cover, although the institute's authorizing legislation set certain limits on uses of the research by federal health agencies.

Patient-centered outcomes are results of health care that can be obtained from a healthcare professional's ability to care for their patients and their patient's families in ways that are meaningful, valuable and helpful to the patient. Patient-centered outcomes focus attention on a patient's beliefs, opinions, and needs in conjunction with a physician's medical expertise and assessment. In the United States, the growth of the healthcare industry has put pressure on providers to see more patients in less time, fill out paperwork in a timely manner, and stay current on the ever-changing medical advancements that occur daily. This increased pressure on healthcare workers has put stress on the provider-patient relationship. The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) is a United States Government funded research institute that funds studies that compare healthcare options to find out what options and situations work best for patients of different circumstances. PCORI uses their research to increase the quality of healthcare and push the healthcare system towards a more patient-centered approach. The Beryl Institute, a non-profit institute dedicated to the improvement of patient experience through Evidence-based research, released data that found that over 90% of patients believe patient-centered outcomes to be "extremely important" to their healthcare experience. Individuals that participated in this study by the Beryl Institute claimed that the aspects of healthcare that they see as most influential to their healthcare experience include effective communication, pain management, a clear and well-explained plan of care and a clean and comfortable environment. In addition to this data, women were found to have the largest issues with lack of patient-centered care, reporting higher rates of pain and less empathy than men.

The Clinical Care Classification (CCC) System is a standardized, coded nursing terminology that identifies the discrete elements of nursing practice. The CCC provides a unique framework and coding structure. Used for documenting the plan of care; following the nursing process in all health care settings.

Digital health is a discipline that includes digital care programs, technologies with health, healthcare, living, and society to enhance the efficiency of healthcare delivery and to make medicine more personalized and precise. It uses information and communication technologies to facilitate understanding of health problems and challenges faced by people receiving medical treatment and social prescribing in more personalised and precise ways. The definitions of digital health and its remits overlap in many ways with those of health and medical informatics.

Health care quality is a level of value provided by any health care resource, as determined by some measurement. As with quality in other fields, it is an assessment of whether something is good enough and whether it is suitable for its purpose. The goal of health care is to provide medical resources of high quality to all who need them; that is, to ensure good quality of life, cure illnesses when possible, to extend life expectancy, and so on. Researchers use a variety of quality measures to attempt to determine health care quality, including counts of a therapy's reduction or lessening of diseases identified by medical diagnosis, a decrease in the number of risk factors which people have following preventive care, or a survey of health indicators in a population who are accessing certain kinds of care.

The Comparative Effectiveness Research Translation Network (CERTAIN) is a learning healthcare system in Washington State focused on patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR) and comparative effectiveness research (CER), leveraging existing healthcare data for research and healthcare improvement, incorporating patient and other healthcare stakeholder voices into research, and facilitating dissemination and implementation of research evidence into clinical practice.

Health care analytics is the health care analysis activities that can be undertaken as a result of data collected from four areas within healthcare; claims and cost data, pharmaceutical and research and development (R&D) data, clinical data, and patient behavior and sentiment data (patient behaviors and preferences,. Health care analytics is a growing industry in the United States, expected to grow to more than $31 billion by 2022. The industry focuses on the areas of clinical analysis, financial analysis, supply chain analysis, as well as marketing, fraud and HR analysis.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Dipak Kalra</span>

Dipak Kalra is President of the European Institute for Health Records and of the European Institute for Innovation through Health Data. He undertakes international research and standards development, and advises on adoption strategies, relating to Electronic Health Records.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Artificial intelligence in healthcare</span> Overview of the use of artificial intelligence in healthcare

Artificial intelligence in healthcare is the application of artificial intelligence (AI) to copy human cognition in the analysis, presentation, and understanding of complex medical and health care data, or to exceed human capabilities by providing new ways to diagnose, treat, or prevent disease. Specifically, AI is the ability of computer algorithms to arrive at approximate conclusions based solely on input data.

Health data is any data "related to health conditions, reproductive outcomes, causes of death, and quality of life" for an individual or population. Health data includes clinical metrics along with environmental, socioeconomic, and behavioral information pertinent to health and wellness. A plurality of health data are collected and used when individuals interact with health care systems. This data, collected by health care providers, typically includes a record of services received, conditions of those services, and clinical outcomes or information concerning those services. Historically, most health data has been sourced from this framework. The advent of eHealth and advances in health information technology, however, have expanded the collection and use of health data—but have also engendered new security, privacy, and ethical concerns. The increasing collection and use of health data by patients is a major component of digital health.

Real world data (RWD) in medicine is data derived from a number of sources that are associated with outcomes in a heterogeneous patient population in real-world settings, including but not limited to electronic health records, health insurance claims and patient surveys. While no universal definition of real world data exists, researchers typically understand RWD as distinct from data sourced from randomized clinical trials.

References

  1. 1 2 Olsen L, Aisner D, McGinnis JM, et al. (U.S. Institute of Medicine) (2007). "The Learning Healthcare System: Workshop Summary". Digital Infrastructure for the Learning Health System: The Foundation for Continuous Improvement in Health and Health Care. National Academies Press (US). ISBN   978-0-309-10300-8. PMID   22379651. Archived from the original on 2020-11-26. Retrieved 2018-06-15.
  2. 1 2 Grossmann C, Powers B, McGinnis JM, eds. (2011). Digital Infrastructure for the Learning Health System: The Foundation for Continuous Improvement in Health and Health Care (PDF). Washington, DC. ISBN   978-0-309-15416-1. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2022-01-20. Retrieved 2018-06-15.{{cite book}}: |work= ignored (help)CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  3. 1 2 3 4 McLachlan S, Potts HW, Dube K, Buchanan D, Lean S, Gallagher T, Johnson O, Daley B, Marsh W, Fenton N (June 2018). "The Heimdall Framework for Supporting Characterisation of Learning Health Systems". Journal of Innovation in Health Informatics. 25 (2): 77–87. doi: 10.14236/jhi.v25i2.996 . PMID   30398449. S2CID   53235486.
  4. ↑ Greene SM, Reid RJ, Larson EB (August 2012). "Implementing the learning health system: from concept to action". Annals of Internal Medicine. 157 (3): 207–10. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-157-3-201208070-00012. PMID   22868839. S2CID   6387264.
  5. ↑ Forrest CB, Margolis P, Seid M, Colletti RB (July 2014). "PEDSnet: how a prototype pediatric learning health system is being expanded into a national network". Health Affairs. 33 (7): 1171–7. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2014.0127 . PMID   25006143.
  6. ↑ Institute of Medicine (2001). Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington DC: National Academy Press. p. 360. doi:10.17226/10027. ISBN   978-0-309-46561-8. PMID   25057539.
  7. ↑ Etheredge LM (2007). "A rapid-learning health system". Health Affairs. 26 (2): w107–18. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.26.2.w107. PMID   17259191.
  8. ↑ Faden RR, Kass NE, Goodman SN, Pronovost P, Tunis S, Beauchamp TL (2013). "An ethics framework for a learning health care system: a departure from traditional research ethics and clinical ethics". The Hastings Center Report. Spec No: S16–27. doi:10.1002/hast.134. PMID   23315888.
  9. ↑ Smith M, Saunders R, Stuckhardt L, McGinnis JM, Committee on the Learning Health Care System in America, Institute of Medicine, et al. (Committee on the Learning Health Care System in America; Institute of Medicine) (2013). Smith M, Saunders R, Stuckhardt L, McGinnis JM (eds.). Best Care at Lower Cost: The Path to Continuously Learning Health Care in America. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press. doi:10.17226/13444. ISBN   978-0-309-26073-2. PMID   24901184. S2CID   173866008.
  10. ↑ McGinnis JM, Fineberg HV, Dzau VJ (July 2021). "Advancing the Learning Health System". The New England Journal of Medicine. 385 (1): 1–5. doi:10.1056/NEJMp2103872. PMID   34192452. S2CID   235696457.
  11. ↑ Seid M, Hartley DM, Margolis PA (July 2021). "A science of collaborative learning health systems". Learning Health Systems. 5 (3): e10278. doi:10.1002/lrh2.10278. PMC   8278442 . PMID   34277944.
  12. ↑ Williams M, Richesson RL, Bray BE, Greenes RA, McIntosh LD, Middleton B, et al. (January 2021). "Summary of third annual MCBK public meeting: Mobilizing computable biomedical knowledge-Accelerating the second knowledge revolution". Learning Health Systems. 5 (1): e10255. doi:10.1002/lrh2.10255. PMC   7804998 . PMID   33490385.
  13. ↑ Demakis JG, McQueen L, Kizer KW, Feussner JR (June 2000). "Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI): A collaboration between research and clinical practice". Medical Care. 38 (6 Suppl 1): I17–I25. doi:10.1097/00005650-200006001-00003. PMID   10843267. Archived from the original on 2022-12-07. Retrieved 2022-12-07.
  14. ↑ Greene SM, Reid RJ, Larson EB (August 2012). "Implementing the learning health system: from concept to action". Annals of Internal Medicine. 157 (3): 207–210. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-157-3-201208070-00012. PMID   22868839. S2CID   6387264.
  15. ↑ Institute of Medicine (US) (2010-07-02). A Foundation for Evidence-Driven Practice: A Rapid Learning System for Cancer Care: Workshop Summary. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press. doi:10.17226/12868. ISBN   978-0-309-15126-9. PMID   25032381.
  16. ↑ Psek WA, Stametz RA, Bailey-Davis LD, Davis D, Darer J, Faucett WA, et al. (2015-03-10). "Operationalizing the learning health care system in an integrated delivery system". eGEMs. 3 (1): 1122. doi:10.13063/2327-9214.1122. PMC   4434917 . PMID   25992388.
  17. ↑ Forrest CB, Margolis PA, Bailey LC, Marsolo K, Del Beccaro MA, Finkelstein JA, et al. (2014-07-01). "PEDSnet: a National Pediatric Learning Health System". Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. 21 (4): 602–606. doi:10.1136/amiajnl-2014-002743. PMC   4078288 . PMID   24821737.
  18. ↑ Abernethy AP, Etheredge LM, Ganz PA, Wallace P, German RR, Neti C, et al. (September 2010). "Rapid-learning system for cancer care". Journal of Clinical Oncology. 28 (27): 4268–4274. doi:10.1200/JCO.2010.28.5478. PMC   2953977 . PMID   20585094.
  19. ↑ McLachlan S, Potts HW, Dube K, Buchanan D, Lean S, Gallagher T, et al. (June 2018). "The Heimdall Framework for Supporting Characterisation of Learning Health Systems". Journal of Innovation in Health Informatics. 25 (2): 77–87. doi: 10.14236/jhi.v25i2.996 . PMID   30398449. S2CID   53235486.
  20. ↑ Menear M, Blanchette MA, Demers-Payette O, Roy D (August 2019). "A framework for value-creating learning health systems". Health Research Policy and Systems. 17 (1): 79. doi: 10.1186/s12961-019-0477-3 . PMC   6688264 . PMID   31399114.
  21. ↑ Foley, Tom; Vale, Luke (2022-05-20). "A framework for understanding, designing, developing and evaluating learning health systems". Learning Health Systems. 7 (1): e10315. doi:10.1002/lrh2.10315. ISSN   2379-6146. PMC   9835047 . PMID   36654802. S2CID   248976825.
  22. ↑ Budrionis A, Bellika JG (December 2016). "The Learning Healthcare System: Where are we now? A systematic review". Journal of Biomedical Informatics. 64: 87–92. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2016.09.018 . PMID   27693565.
  23. ↑ Platt JE, Raj M, Wienroth M (March 2020). "An Analysis of the Learning Health System in Its First Decade in Practice: Scoping Review". Journal of Medical Internet Research. 22 (3): e17026. doi: 10.2196/17026 . PMC   7118548 . PMID   32191214.
  24. ↑ Nash DM, Bhimani Z, Rayner J, Zwarenstein M (June 2021). "Learning health systems in primary care: a systematic scoping review". BMC Family Practice. 22 (1): 126. doi: 10.1186/s12875-021-01483-z . PMC   8223335 . PMID   34162336.
  25. ↑ Ellis LA, Sarkies M, Churruca K, Dammery G, Meulenbroeks I, Smith CL, et al. (February 2022). "The Science of Learning Health Systems: Scoping Review of Empirical Research". JMIR Medical Informatics. 10 (2): e34907. doi: 10.2196/34907 . PMC   8908194 . PMID   35195529.
  26. ↑ Easterling D, Perry AC, Woodside R, Patel T, Gesell SB (April 2022). "Clarifying the concept of a learning health system for healthcare delivery organizations: Implications from a qualitative analysis of the scientific literature". Learning Health Systems. 6 (2): e10287. doi:10.1002/lrh2.10287. PMC   9006535 . PMID   35434353.
  27. ↑ Masica AL, Velasco F, Nelson TL, Medford RJ, Hughes AE, Pandey A, et al. (October 2022). "The Texas Health Resources Clinical Scholars Program: Learning healthcare system workforce development through embedded translational research". Learning Health Systems. 6 (4): e10332. doi:10.1002/lrh2.10332. PMC   9576247 . PMID   36263262.
  28. ↑ McLachlan S, Dube K, Johnson O, Buchanan D, Potts HW, Gallagher T, Fenton N (October 2019). "A framework for analysing learning health systems: Are we removing the most impactful barriers?". Learning Health Systems. 3 (4): e10189. doi:10.1002/lrh2.10189. PMC   6802533 . PMID   31641685.
  29. ↑ Paul Taylor (2007). Taylor P (ed.). From Patient Data to Medical Knowledge: The Principles and Practice of Health Informatics. Blackwell Publishing Ltd. doi:10.1002/9780470994702. ISBN   9780470994702. Archived from the original on 2021-06-17. Retrieved 2018-06-15.
  30. 1 2 Deeny SR, Steventon A (August 2015). "Making sense of the shadows: priorities for creating a learning healthcare system based on routinely collected data". BMJ Quality & Safety. 24 (8): 505–15. doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004278. PMC   4515981 . PMID   26065466.
  31. ↑ Abernethy AP, Ahmad A, Zafar SY, Wheeler JL, Reese JB, Lyerly HK (June 2010). "Electronic patient-reported data capture as a foundation of rapid learning cancer care". Medical Care. 48 (6 Suppl): S32–8. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181db53a4 . PMID   20473201. S2CID   25887372.
  32. ↑ Friedman CP, Wong AK, Blumenthal D (November 2010). "Achieving a nationwide learning health system". Science Translational Medicine. 2 (57): 57cm29. doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.3001456. PMID   21068440. S2CID   19569336.
  33. ↑ Bradley EH, Curry LA, Ramanadhan S, Rowe L, Nembhard IM, Krumholz HM (May 2009). "Research in action: using positive deviance to improve quality of health care". Implementation Science. 4: 25. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-4-25 . PMC   2690576 . PMID   19426507.
  34. ↑ Lewis G, Kirkham H, Duncan I, Vaithianathan R (April 2013). "How health systems could avert 'triple fail' events that are harmful, are costly, and result in poor patient satisfaction". Health Affairs. 32 (4): 669–76. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2012.1350. PMID   23569046.
  35. 1 2 3 Foley TJ, Vale L (October 2017). "What role for learning health systems in quality improvement within healthcare providers?". Learning Health Systems. 1 (4): e10025. doi:10.1002/lrh2.10025. PMC   6508561 . PMID   31245567.
  36. ↑ Ye Y, Wamukoya M, Ezeh A, Emina JB, Sankoh O (September 2012). "Health and demographic surveillance systems: a step towards full civil registration and vital statistics system in sub-Sahara Africa?". BMC Public Health. 12: 741. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-12-741 . PMC   3509035 . PMID   22950896.
  37. ↑ Forrest CB, Chesley FD, Tregear ML, Mistry KB (August 2018). "Development of the Learning Health System Researcher Core Competencies". Health Services Research. 53 (4): 2615–2632. doi:10.1111/1475-6773.12751. PMC   6051975 . PMID   28777456.
  38. ↑ "AHRQ and PCORI Institutional Mentored Career Development Program (K12) to Support the Next Generation of Learning Health System Researchers". www.ahrq.gov. Archived from the original on 2021-06-23. Retrieved 2021-05-22.
  39. ↑ "Supporting the Next Generation of Learning Health Systems Researchers". www.pcori.org. October 27, 2017. Archived from the original on February 19, 2020. Retrieved February 19, 2020.
  40. ↑ "AHRQ and PCORI Announce Awards to Support The Next Generation of Learning-Health-System Researchers". www.ahrq.gov. Archived from the original on 2021-05-22. Retrieved 2021-05-22.
  41. ↑ "CATALyST K12 - Early Career Scientist Training". Archived from the original on 2020-03-20. Retrieved 2020-02-19.
  42. ↑ "IU-Regenstrief receive award for learning health system researchers". Archived from the original on 2020-02-19. Retrieved 2020-02-19.
  43. ↑ "Minnesota Learning Health System - Projects and Research Studies - School of Public Health - University of Minnesota". Archived from the original on 2020-02-19. Retrieved 2020-02-19.
  44. ↑ "PACT-K12 | OHSU". www.ohsu.edu. Archived from the original on 2021-09-09. Retrieved 2020-02-19.
  45. ↑ "Scholars - PEDSnet". pedsnet.org. Archived from the original on 2020-02-19.
  46. ↑ "SPIRIT K12 - General Internal Medicine & Health Services Research - UCLA Health - Los Angeles, CA". www.uclahealth.org. Archived from the original on 2020-02-19. Retrieved 2020-02-19.
  47. ↑ Faden RR, Kass NE, Goodman SN, Pronovost P, Tunis S, Beauchamp TL (January 2013). "An ethics framework for a learning health care system: a departure from traditional research ethics and clinical ethics". The Hastings Center Report. Spec No (s1): S16–S27. doi:10.1002/hast.134. PMID   23315888.
  48. ↑ Finkelstein JA, Brickman AL, Capron A, Ford DE, Gombosev A, Greene SM, et al. (October 2015). "Oversight on the borderline: Quality improvement and pragmatic research". Clinical Trials. 12 (5): 457–466. doi:10.1177/1740774515597682. PMC   4699562 . PMID   26374685.
  49. ↑ Asch DA, Joffe S, Bierer BE, Greene SM, Lieu TA, Platt JE, et al. (December 2020). "Rethinking ethical oversight in the era of the learning health system". Healthcare. 8 (4): 100462. doi: 10.1016/j.hjdsi.2020.100462 . PMID   32992106. S2CID   221725518.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.