Patients Treated at Multiple Acute Health Care Facilities

Bourgeois, F. C. (2010). Patients Treated at Multiple Acute Health Care Facilities: Quantifying Information Fragmentation. Archives of Internal Medicine, 170(22), 1989-1995.

Type

Journal article

Intellectual base

Primary research

Year

2010

Volume

170

Issue

22

Pages

1989-1995

DOI

10.1001/archinternmed.2010.439

DOI registrant

American Medical Association

Link

https://doi.org/10.1001/archinternmed.2010.439

Cited from

computer_science

Cited by

1 citation across 1 artifact.

Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.

Primes

• Client Server Model
  • and this entry reads centralized-record adoption in clinical settings as the same move, given that patients treated at several acute-care facilities have their information measurably fragmented across them.

    This sourceQuantifies the fragmentation of patient information across acute-care facilities and offers it as "one basis for assessing the value of an integrated electronic health information system." It measures hospital and emergency-department encounters only, covers no registries, does not show that centralizing records resolves the fragmentation, and draws no analogy to cache invalidation.

    Supported in partVerified against the work's full text

    The study measures how many Massachusetts patients use multiple acute-care sites and says this bears on integrated health information systems; it does not equate centralization with a client-server move.

    “A total of 1 130 124 adult patients (31%) visited 2 or more hospitals during the study period, accounting for 56.5% of all acute care visits”

    Read by an automated reader; not a human review. How support was checked

Verification

Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.

Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 1 citation: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.

Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.

See how references were verified.

Registry ID ref:5bc28c965d91 · see in the full table