Imperial College London

MrRyanCallahan

Faculty of MedicineDepartment of Surgery & Cancer

Honorary Research Fellow
 
 
 
//

Contact

 

r.callahan

 
 
//

Location

 

1025Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother Wing (QEQM)St Mary's Campus

//

Summary

 

Publications

Publication Type
Year
to

5 results found

Flott K, Callahan R, Darzi A, Mayer Eet al., 2016, A Patient-Centered Framework for Evaluating Digital Maturity of Health Services: A Systematic Review, Journal of Medical Internet Research, Vol: 18, ISSN: 1439-4456

Background: Digital maturity is the extent to which digital technologies are used as enablers to deliver a high-quality health service. Extensive literature exists about how to assess the components of digital maturity, but it has not been used to design a comprehensive framework for evaluation. Consequently, the measurement systems that do exist are limited to evaluating digital programs within one service or care setting, meaning that digital maturity evaluation is not accounting for the needs of patients across their care pathways.Objective: The objective of our study was to identify the best methods and metrics for evaluating digital maturity and to create a novel, evidence-based tool for evaluating digital maturity across patient care pathways.Methods: We systematically reviewed the literature to find the best methods and metrics for evaluating digital maturity. We searched the PubMed database for all papers relevant to digital maturity evaluation. Papers were selected if they provided insight into how to appraise digital systems within the health service and if they indicated the factors that constitute or facilitate digital maturity. Papers were analyzed to identify methodology for evaluating digital maturity and indicators of digitally mature systems. We then used the resulting information about methodology to design an evaluation framework. Following that, the indicators of digital maturity were extracted and grouped into increasing levels of maturity and operationalized as metrics within the evaluation framework.Results: We identified 28 papers as relevant to evaluating digital maturity, from which we derived 5 themes. The first theme concerned general evaluation methodology for constructing the framework (7 papers). The following 4 themes were the increasing levels of digital maturity: resources and ability (6 papers), usage (7 papers), interoperability (3 papers), and impact (5 papers). The framework includes metrics for each of these levels at each stag

Journal article

Mayer E, Flott K, Callahan RP, Darzi Aet al., 2016, National Reporting and Learning System Research and Development

This report presents the findings of the NRLS Researchand Development Programme conducted by thePatient Safety Translational Research Centre (PSTRC)and the Centre for Health Policy (CHP) at ImperialCollege London.It sets out the current state of affairs regardingpatient safety incident reporting in the NHS, andspecifies where the most pressing areas of concerns are,including thorough descriptions of the various incidentreporting systems used in the NHS today. Furthermore itidentifies areas for improvement in the overall landscapeof incident reporting, and suggests how systems like theNRLS can capitalise on developments in technology.The main body of the report is then devoted toexplaining the findings from the research programme. Theresearch was divided into four domains, and the reportdetails the new findings discovered about each of them:1. Purpose of incident reporting in healthcare2. User experience with reporting systems3. Data quality and analysis4. Effective feedback for learningBuilding on these findings, the report moves on to describehow they can be applied to the next generation ofincident reporting. Specifically, it focuses on a prototypefor a new incident reporting system that incorporates theimprovement ideas generated by the research.Finally, the report concludes with a description ofan evidence-based framework for evaluating incidentreporting systems and an ‘Achievement Toolkit’ often recommendations for improvements to incidentreporting systems.

Report

Callahan R, Darzi A, 2015, Five Policy Levers To Meet The Value Challenge In Cancer Care, HEALTH AFFAIRS, Vol: 34, Pages: 1563-1568, ISSN: 0278-2715

Journal article

Jilka SR, Callahan R, Sevdalis N, Mayer EK, Darzi Aet al., 2015, "Nothing About Me Without Me": An Interpretative Review of Patient Accessible Electronic Health Records, Journal of Medical Internet Research, Vol: 17, ISSN: 1439-4456

BackgroundPatient accessible electronic health records (PAEHRs) enable patients to access and manage personalclinical information that is made available to them by their health care providers (HCPs). It is thought thatthe shared management nature of medical record access improves patient outcomes and improves patientsatisfaction. However, recent reviews have found that this is not the case. Furthermore, little research hasfocused on PAEHRs from the HCP viewpoint. HCPs include physicians, nurses, and service providers.ObjectiveWe provide a systematic review of reviews of the impact of giving patients record access from both apatient and HCP point of view. The review covers a broad range of outcome measures, including patientsafety, patient satisfaction, privacy and security, self-efficacy, and health outcome.MethodsA systematic search was conducted using Web of Science to identify review articles on the impact ofPAEHRs. Our search was limited to English-language reviews published between January 2002 andNovember 2014. A total of 73 citations were retrieved from a series of Boolean search terms including“review*” with “patient access to records”. These reviews went through a novel scoring system analysiswhereby we calculated how many positive outcomes were reported per every outcome measureinvestigated. This provided a way to quantify the impact of PAEHRs.Results1 1 2 1112Ten reviews covering chronic patients (eg, diabetes and hypertension) and primary care patients, as well asHCPs were found but eight were included for the analysis of outcome measures. We found mixedoutcomes across both patient and HCP groups, with approximately half of the reviews showing positivechanges with record access. Patients believe that record access increases their perception of control;however, outcome measures thought to create psychological concerns (such as patient anxiety as a result ofseeing their medical record) are still unanswered. Nurses are more likely th

Journal article

Thomas RJS, Callahan RP, Bartlett R, Geissler Jet al., 2015, Delivering Affordable Cancer Care: A Value Challenge to Health Systems, Doha, Publisher: Qatar Foundation

Report

This data is extracted from the Web of Science and reproduced under a licence from Thomson Reuters. You may not copy or re-distribute this data in whole or in part without the written consent of the Science business of Thomson Reuters.

Request URL: http://wlsprd.imperial.ac.uk:80/respub/WEB-INF/jsp/search-html.jsp Request URI: /respub/WEB-INF/jsp/search-html.jsp Query String: respub-action=search.html&id=00810448&limit=30&person=true