Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 1/2020

Open Access 01-12-2020 | Research article

Envisioning the future of clinical analytics: a modified Delphi process in New South Wales, Australia

Authors: Kim Sutherland, Wilson Yeung, Yoke Mak, Jean-Frederic Levesque, the NSW Health Clinical Analytics Working Group

Published in: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making | Issue 1/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Clinical analytics is a rapidly developing area of informatics and knowledge mobilisation which has huge potential to improve healthcare in the future. It is widely acknowledged to be a powerful mediator of clinical decision making, patient-centred care and organisational learning. As a result, healthcare systems require a strategic foundation for clinical analytics that is sufficiently directional to support meaningful change while flexible enough to allow for iteration and responsiveness to context as change occurs.

Methods

In New South Wales, the most populous state in Australia, the Clinical Analytics Working Group was charged with developing a five-year vision for the public health system. A modified Delphi process was undertaken to elicit expert views and to reach a consensus. The process included a combination of face-to-face workshops, traditional Delphi voting via email, and innovative, real-time iteration between text re-formulation and voting until consensus was reached. The six stage process engaged 35 experts — practising clinicians, patients and consumers, managers, policymakers, data scientists and academics.

Results

The process resulted in the production of 135 ideas that were subsequently synthesised into 23 agreed statements and encapsulated in a single page (456 word) narrative.

Conclusion

The visioning process highlighted three key perspectives (clinicians, patients and managers) and the need for synchronous (during the clinical encounter) and asynchronous (outside the clinical encounter) clinical decision support and reflective practice tools; the use of new and multiple data sources and communication formats; and the role of research and education.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation. Future of Health. Canberra: CSIRO; 2018. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation. Future of Health. Canberra: CSIRO; 2018.
2.
go back to reference National Institutes of Health. All of Us – Precision Medicine Initiative. Washington DC: NIH; 2017. National Institutes of Health. All of Us – Precision Medicine Initiative. Washington DC: NIH; 2017.
3.
go back to reference Song TM, Ryu S. Big data analysis framework for healthcare and social sectors in Korea. Healthc Inform Res. 2015;21(1):3–9.CrossRef Song TM, Ryu S. Big data analysis framework for healthcare and social sectors in Korea. Healthc Inform Res. 2015;21(1):3–9.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Imison C, Castle-Clarke S, Watson R, Edwards N. Delivering the Benefits of digital healthcare. London: The Nuffield Trust; 2016. Imison C, Castle-Clarke S, Watson R, Edwards N. Delivering the Benefits of digital healthcare. London: The Nuffield Trust; 2016.
5.
go back to reference Australian Digital Health Agency. Framework for Action: How Australia will deliver the benefits of digitally enabled health and care. ADHA: Canberra; 2017. Australian Digital Health Agency. Framework for Action: How Australia will deliver the benefits of digitally enabled health and care. ADHA: Canberra; 2017.
9.
go back to reference NSW Health. NSW Health Analytics Framework: transformed health through data and insights. Sydney: NSW Ministry of Health; 2017. NSW Health. NSW Health Analytics Framework: transformed health through data and insights. Sydney: NSW Ministry of Health; 2017.
10.
go back to reference Womack DM, Kennedy R, Bria B. Current practices in clinical analytics: a hospital survey report. NI 2012 (2012). 2012;2012:458. Womack DM, Kennedy R, Bria B. Current practices in clinical analytics: a hospital survey report. NI 2012 (2012). 2012;2012:458.
11.
go back to reference An JY. Healthcare analytics for quality and performance [book review]. Healthc Inform Res. 2013;19(4):324–5.CrossRef An JY. Healthcare analytics for quality and performance [book review]. Healthc Inform Res. 2013;19(4):324–5.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Santucci W, Day R, Baysari M. Evaluation of hospital-wide computerised decision support in an intensive care unit: an observational study. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2016;44(4):507–12.CrossRef Santucci W, Day R, Baysari M. Evaluation of hospital-wide computerised decision support in an intensive care unit: an observational study. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2016;44(4):507–12.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference The Lancet Oncology. Clinical decision making: more than just an algorithm. Lancet Oncol. 2017;18(12):1553.CrossRef The Lancet Oncology. Clinical decision making: more than just an algorithm. Lancet Oncol. 2017;18(12):1553.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Hsu CC, Sandford BA. The Delphi technique: making sense of consensus. Pract Assess Res Eval. 2007;12(10):1–8. Hsu CC, Sandford BA. The Delphi technique: making sense of consensus. Pract Assess Res Eval. 2007;12(10):1–8.
16.
go back to reference Holen-Rabbersvik E, Eikebrokk TR, Fensli RW, Thygesen E, Slettbo A. Important challenges for coordination and inter-municipal cooperation in health care services: a Delphi study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2013;13(1):451.CrossRef Holen-Rabbersvik E, Eikebrokk TR, Fensli RW, Thygesen E, Slettbo A. Important challenges for coordination and inter-municipal cooperation in health care services: a Delphi study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2013;13(1):451.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Halvorsrud K, Flynn D, Ford G, et al. A Delphi study and ranking exercise to support commissioning services: future delivery of thrombectomy services in England. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018;18:135.CrossRef Halvorsrud K, Flynn D, Ford G, et al. A Delphi study and ranking exercise to support commissioning services: future delivery of thrombectomy services in England. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018;18:135.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Dewa L, Murray K, Thibaut B, Ramtale S, Adam S, Darzi A, Archer S. Identifying research priorities for patient safety in mental health: an international expert Delphi study. BMJ Open. 2018;8:3. Dewa L, Murray K, Thibaut B, Ramtale S, Adam S, Darzi A, Archer S. Identifying research priorities for patient safety in mental health: an international expert Delphi study. BMJ Open. 2018;8:3.
19.
go back to reference Deane H, Wilson C, Babl F, et al. PREDICT prioritisation study: establishing the research priorities of paediatric emergency medicine physicians in Australia and New Zealand. Emerg Med J. 2018;35(1):39–45.CrossRef Deane H, Wilson C, Babl F, et al. PREDICT prioritisation study: establishing the research priorities of paediatric emergency medicine physicians in Australia and New Zealand. Emerg Med J. 2018;35(1):39–45.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Helmer-Hirschberg O. Analysis of the Future: The Delphi Method. California: RAND Corporation; 1967. Helmer-Hirschberg O. Analysis of the Future: The Delphi Method. California: RAND Corporation; 1967.
21.
go back to reference Lim M, Thompson B, D’Silva C, et al. Development and reliability of an appropriateness and prioritization instrument for eye care practice: a modified Delphi process. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 20019;27(1):19–28. Lim M, Thompson B, D’Silva C, et al. Development and reliability of an appropriateness and prioritization instrument for eye care practice: a modified Delphi process. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 20019;27(1):19–28.
22.
go back to reference Eubank BH, Mohtadi NG, Lafave MR, et al. Using the modified Delphi method to establish clinical consensus for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with rotator cuff pathology. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2016;16:56.CrossRef Eubank BH, Mohtadi NG, Lafave MR, et al. Using the modified Delphi method to establish clinical consensus for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with rotator cuff pathology. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2016;16:56.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Schneider P, Evaniew N, Rendon JS, on behalf of The PARITY Investigators, et al. Moving forward through consensus: protocol for a modified Delphi approach to determine the top research priorities in the field of orthopaedic oncology. BMJ Open. 2016;6:e011780.CrossRef Schneider P, Evaniew N, Rendon JS, on behalf of The PARITY Investigators, et al. Moving forward through consensus: protocol for a modified Delphi approach to determine the top research priorities in the field of orthopaedic oncology. BMJ Open. 2016;6:e011780.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Simon H. Rational Choice and the Structure of the Environment. Psychol Rev. 1956;63(2):129–38.CrossRef Simon H. Rational Choice and the Structure of the Environment. Psychol Rev. 1956;63(2):129–38.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Greenes R. Definition, Scope and Challenges IN: Clinical Decision Support: the road to broad adoption 2nd ed. London: Academic Press; 2014. Greenes R. Definition, Scope and Challenges IN: Clinical Decision Support: the road to broad adoption 2nd ed. London: Academic Press; 2014.
Metadata
Title
Envisioning the future of clinical analytics: a modified Delphi process in New South Wales, Australia
Authors
Kim Sutherland
Wilson Yeung
Yoke Mak
Jean-Frederic Levesque
the NSW Health Clinical Analytics Working Group
Publication date
01-12-2020
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making / Issue 1/2020
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6947
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-020-01226-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 1/2020 Go to the issue