PubMed HealthSearch

PubMed · 9794311

Canopy computing: using the Web in clinical practice.

Abstract

The rain forest canopy is a seamless web through which arboreal creatures efficiently move to reach the edible fruits without any attention to the individual trees. Individual health care computer systems are rich with patient data, but rather than a canopy linking all the trees in the forest, the data "fruit" come from a diverse forest of individual computer "trees"-laboratory systems, word processing systems, pharmacy systems, and the like. These different sources of patient information are difficult or impossible to reach by individual physicians, especially from their offices. The World Wide Web and other standardization technology provide physicians and their institutions the tools needed for seamless and secure access to their patients' data and to medical information, when and where they need it. We and others have adopted these tools to combine independent sources of clinical data. Physicians who assist in the purchase of clinical information systems should demand products in their practice settings that are Web enabled, use standard coding systems, and communicate with other computer systems via broadly accepted protocols.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

C J McDonald, J M Overhage, P R Dexter, L Blevins, J Meeks-Johnson, J G Suico, M C Tucker, G Schadow. 1998-10-21. Canopy computing: using the Web in clinical practice.. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.280.15.1325

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Clinical epidemiological quality in molecular genetic research: the need for methodological standards.

CONTEXT: A genetic basis has been identified for many medical conditions and some molecular tests have been commercialized. However, little attention has been given to the quality of clinical epidemiology in molecular studies. OBJECTIVE: To examine the clinical epidemiological quality of recent publications on molecular genetic analysis. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study of original research articles published in 1995, identified by manually searching 4 general clinical journals. Of 83 articles identified, 40 were selected for analysis; these 40 discussed molecular genetic techniques, studied 10 or more patients, and had inferential conclusions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Compliance of the selected articles with 7 methodological standards for clinical epidemiological science (reproducibility, objectivity, delineation of case group, adequacy of spectrum in case group, delineation of comparison group, adequacy of comparison group, and quantitative summary of results). RESULTS: Among the 40 inferential articles that studied 10 or more patients, only 5 (12.5%) complied with all 7 applicable standards, and 10 (25.0%) complied with all but 1 standard, whereas 25 articles (62.5%) failed to comply with 2 or more standards and 9 (22.5%) failed 4 or 5 standards. Most articles did not comply with standards for reproducibility (n = 25, 62.5%) or objectivity (n = 27, 67.5%); however, the majority of articles did comply with standards for adequacy of case group (n = 35, 87.5 %), adequacy of comparison group (n = 35, 87.5%), and quantitative summary of results (n = 36, 90%). CONCLUSIONS: Despite major laboratory advances in molecular genetic analysis, our data suggest that reported applications in clinical journals often have troubling omissions, deficiencies, and lack of attention to the different, but necessary, principles of clinical epidemiological science. Without suitable attention to fundamental methodological standards, the expected benefits of molecular genetic testing may not be achieved.

Clinical Medicine