Download PDF
Methods Inf Med 2017; 56(S 01): e1-e10
DOI: 10.3414/ME16-01-0125
Original Articles
Schattauer GmbH

Research Strategies for Biomedical and Health Informatics

Some Thought-provoking and Critical Proposals to Encourage Scientific Debate on the Nature of Good Research in Medical Informatics
Reinhold Haux
1   Peter L. Reichertz Institute for Medical Informatics, University of Braunschweig and Hannover Medical School, Germany
,
Casimir A. Kulikowski
2   Department of Computer Science, Rutgers - The State University of New Jersey, NJ, USA
,
Suzanne Bakken
3   School of Nursing and Department of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
,
Simon de Lusignan
1   Peter L. Reichertz Institute for Medical Informatics, University of Braunschweig and Hannover Medical School, Germany
,
Michio Kimura
3   School of Nursing and Department of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
,
Sabine Koch
3   School of Nursing and Department of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
,
John Mantas
1   Peter L. Reichertz Institute for Medical Informatics, University of Braunschweig and Hannover Medical School, Germany
,
Victor Maojo
3   School of Nursing and Department of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
,
Michael Marschollek
3   School of Nursing and Department of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
,
Fernando Martin-Sanchez
3   School of Nursing and Department of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
,
Anne Moen
4   Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK
4   Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK
,
Hyeoun-Ae Park
1   Peter L. Reichertz Institute for Medical Informatics, University of Braunschweig and Hannover Medical School, Germany
,
Indra Neil Sarkar
1   Peter L. Reichertz Institute for Medical Informatics, University of Braunschweig and Hannover Medical School, Germany
,
Tze Yun Leong
1   Peter L. Reichertz Institute for Medical Informatics, University of Braunschweig and Hannover Medical School, Germany
1   Peter L. Reichertz Institute for Medical Informatics, University of Braunschweig and Hannover Medical School, Germany
,
Alexa T. McCray
1   Peter L. Reichertz Institute for Medical Informatics, University of Braunschweig and Hannover Medical School, Germany
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

received: 05 November 2016

accepted: 17 January 2016

Publication Date:
31 January 2018 (online)

   Permissions and Reprints

Summary

Background: Medical informatics, or biomedical and health informatics (BMHI), has become an established scientific discipline. In all such disciplines there is a certain inertia to persist in focusing on well-established research areas and to hold on to well-known research methodologies rather than adopting new ones, which may be more appropriate.

Objectives: To search for answers to the following questions: What are research fields in informatics, which are not being currently adequately addressed, and which methodological approaches might be insufficiently used? Do we know about reasons? What could be consequences of change for research and for education?

Methods: Outstanding informatics scientists were invited to three panel sessions on this topic in leading international conferences (MIE 2015, Medinfo 2015, HEC 2016) in order to get their answers to these questions.

Results: A variety of themes emerged in the set of answers provided by the panellists. Some panellists took the theoretical foundations of the field for granted, while several questioned whether the field was actually grounded in a strong theoretical foundation. Panellists proposed a range of suggestions for new or improved approaches, methodologies, and techniques to enhance the BMHI research agenda.

Conclusions: The field of BMHI is on the one hand maturing as an academic community and intellectual endeavour. On the other hand vendor-supplied solutions may be too readily and uncritically accepted in health care practice. There is a high chance that BMHI will continue to flourish as an important discipline; its innovative interventions might then reach the original objectives of advancing science and improving health care outcomes.

Keywords

Biomedical informatics - health informatics - medical informatics - research - education
 

  • References

  • 1 van Bemmel JH. Medical informatics, art or science?. Methods Inf Med 1996; 35: 157-172 discussion 173-201.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Musen MA, van Bemmel JH. Challenges for medical informatics as an academic discipline. Methods Inf Med 2002; 41: 1-3.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Kulikowski CA. IMIA: coalescing medical informatics worldwide for 40 years. Yearb Med Inform 2007; 176-185. Erratum in: Yearb Med Inform. 2008: 19.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Haux R. Medical informatics: past, present, future. Int J Med Inform 2010; 79: 599-610.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Shortliffe EH. The future of biomedical informatics: a perspective from academia. Stud Health Technol Inform 2012; 180: 19-24.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Lehmann CU, Jaulent MC, Seroussi B. editors. IMIA yearbook of medical informatics 2016. Special 25th anniversary edition. Stuttgart: Schattauer;; 2016
    Google Scholar
  • 7 International Medical Informatics Association. [cited 2016 Sept 25]. Available from: http://imia-medinfo.org
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 European Federation for Medical Informatics. [cited 2016 Sept 25]. Available from: http://www.efmi.org.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Maojo V, Garcia-Remesal M, Bielza C, Crespo J, Perez-Rey D, Kulikowski C. Biomedical informatics publications: a global perspective. Part I: Conferences. Methods Inf Med 2012; 51: 82-90 and Part II: Journals. Methods Inf Med. 2012; 51: 131-137.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Haux R. On determining factors for good research in biomedical and health informatics. Some lessons learned. Yearb Med Inform 2014; 9: 255-264 discussion 265-272.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Schuemie MJ, Talmon JL, Moorman PW, Kors JA. Mapping the domain of medical informatics. Methods Inf Med 2009; 48: 76-83.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Yergens DW, Tam-Tham H, Minty EP. Visualization of the IMIA yearbook of medical informatics publications over the last 25 years. Yearb Med Inform 2016; Suppl 1: S130-138.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Moen A, Knudsen LMM. Nursing informatics: Decades of contribution to health informatics. Healthc Inform Res 2013; 19: 86-92.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Brennan PF, Bakken S. Nursing needs big data and big data needs nursing. J Nurs Scholar 2015; 47: 477-484.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Bakken S, Reame N. The promise and potential perils of big data for advancing symptom management research in populations at risk for health disparities. Ann Rev Nurs Res 2016; 34: 247-260.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Mantas J, Ammenwerth E, Demiris G, Hasman A, Haux R, Hersh W. et al. Recommendations of the International Medical Informatics Association (IMIA) on Education in Biomedical and Health Informatics. First Revision. Methods Inf Med 2010; 49: 105-120.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Kulikowski CA, Shortliffe EH, Currie LM, Elkin PL, Hunter LE, Johnson TR. et al. AMIA Board wAMIA Board white paper: definition of biomedical informatics and specification of core competencies for graduate education in the discipline. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2012; 19: 931-938.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Cornet R, Andersen SK, Stoicu-Tivadar L, Parra Calderón CL, Hercigonja-Szekeres M, Hörbst A. editors. Digital Healthcare Empowering Europeans: Proceedings of MIE2015. Amsterdam: IOS Press;; 2015
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Sarkar IN, Georgiou A, Mazzoncini de Azevedo Marques P. editors. MEDINFO 2015: eHealth-enabled Health. Proceedings of the 15th World Congress on Health and Biomedical Informatics. Amsterdam: IOS Press;; 2015
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Hörbst A, Hackl WO, de Keizer N, Prokosch HU, Hercigonja-Szekeres M, de Lusignan S. editors. Exploring Complexity in Health: An Interdisciplinary Systems Approach. Proceedings of MIE2016 at HEC2016. Amsterdam: IOS Press;; 2016
    Google Scholar
  • 21 Asia Pacific Association for Medical Informatics [cited 2016 Sept 25].. Available from:. http://www.apami.org.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 American Medical Informatics Association (with American College of Medical Informatics). [cited 2016 Sept 25]. Available from: https://www.amia.org.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Grémy F. Hardware, software, peopleware, subjectivity. A philosophical promenade. Methods Inf Med 2005; 44: 352-358.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Ainsworth J, Buchan I. Combining health data uses to ignite health system learning. Methods Inf Med 2015; 54: 479-487.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Detmer DE. At last! A working model of a data ecosystem for continuous learning in the evolving health noosphere. Methods Inf Med 2015; 54: 477-478.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Denaxas S, Friedman CP, Geissbuhler A, Hemingway H, Kalra D, Kimura M. et al. Discussion of “Combining health data uses to ignite health system learning”. Methods Inf Med 2015; 54: 488-499.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Ammenwerth E. Evidence-based health informatics: How do we know what we know?. Methods Inf Med 2015; 54: 298-307.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Rigby M. Optimising health informatics outcomes - getting good evidence to where it matters. Methods Inf Med 2015; 54: 295-297.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Al-Shorbaji N, Hanmer L, Hussein R, Magrabi F, Moen A, Moura LA. et al. Discussion of “Evidence-based health informatics: How do we know what we know?”. Methods Inf Med 2015; 54: 308-318.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Deserno TM, Marx N. Computational electrocardiography: revisiting Holter ECG monitoring. Methods Inf Med 2016; 55: 305-311.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Yana K. Editorial for “Computational electrocar-diography: revisiting Holter ECG monitoring”. Methods Inf Med 2016; 55: 303-304.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Baumgartner C, Caiani EG, Dickhaus H, Kulikowski CA, Schiecke K, van Bemmel JH, Witte H. Discussion of “Computational electrocardiogra-phy: revisiting Holter ECG monitoring”. Methods Inf Med 2016; 55: 312-321.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Martin-Sanchez FJ, Lopez-Campos GH. The new role of biomedical informatics in the age of digital medicine. Methods Inf Med 2016; 55: 392-402.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Shortliffe EH. Digital Medicine and Biomedical Informatics: What’s in a Name?. Methods Inf Med 2016; 55: 389-391.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Al-Shorbaji N, Bellazzi R, Gonzalez Bernaldo de Quiros F, Koch S, Kulikowski CA, Lovell NH. et al. Discussion of “The new role of biomedical informatics in the age of digital medicine”. Methods Inf Med 2016; 55: 403-421.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Correa A, Hinton W, McGovern A, van Vlymen J, Yonova I, Jones S, de Lusignan S. Royal College of General Practitioners Research and Surveillance Centre (RCGP RSC) sentinel network: a cohort profile. BMJ Open 2016; 6: e011092.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 de Lusignan S, van Weel C. The use of routinely collected computer data for research in primary care: opportunities and challenges. Fam Pract 2006; 23: 253-263.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Chambers JC, Loh M, Lehne B, Drong A, Kriebel J, Motta V. et al. Epigenome-wide association of DNA methylation markers in peripheral blood from Indian Asians and Europeans with incident type 2 diabetes: a nested case-control study. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2015; 3: 526-534.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Kimura M, Shimizu K, Kuwahara M, Kaihara S, Koyama T, Tsuchiya F. et al. Knowledge-based antibiotic medication counselling system ANTICIPATOR and its implementation by Prolog. MEDINFO83 1983; 589-592.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Fukuda S, Maeda A, Kimura M. Development of an expert system for welding design support (to provide advice on determination of weld condition to prevent weld cracking in a pressure vessel). J Jap Soc Mech Eng 1986; 52: 1183-1190. (Japanese).
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Nomura K. referring to Matsura Kiyoshi, “Kendan”, 1821
    PubMed
  • 42 Shortliffe EH, Perreault L, editors; Wiederhold G, Fagan LM. associate editors. Medical informatics: Computer applications in health care and biomedicine. New York: Springer;; 2000
    Google Scholar
  • 43 Neskey DM, Osman AA, Ow TJ, Katsonis P, McDonald T, Hicks SC. et al. Evolutionary action score of TP53 identifies high-risk mutations associated with decreased survival and increased distant metastases in head and neck cancer. Cancer Res 2015; 75: 1527-1536.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Hutcherson C, Bushong B, Rangle A. A neurocom-putational model of altruistic choice and its implications. Neuron 2015; 87: 451-462.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Strombach T, Weber B, Hangebrauk Z, Kenning P, Karipidis II, Tobler PN, Kalenscher T. Social discounting involves modulation of neural value signals by temporoparietal junction. PNAS 2015; 112: 1619-1624.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Kuhn KA, Knoll A, Mewes HW, Schwaiger M, Bode A, Broy M. et al. Informatics and medicine -from molecules to populations. Methods Inf Med 2008; 47: 283-295.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Lakoff G, Nunez RE. Where mathematics comes from: How the embodied mind brings mathematics into being. New York: Basic Books;; 2000
    Google Scholar
  • 48 Kulikowski CA, Kulikowski CW. Biomedical and health informatics in translational medicine. Methods Inf Med 2009; 48: 4-10.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Ruiz-Calderon JF, Cavallin H, Song SJ, Novoselac A, Pericchi LR, Hernandez JN. et al. Walls talk: Microbial biogeography of homes spanning urbanization. Sci Adv 2016; 2: e1501061.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Fauconnier G, Turner M. The Way We Think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York: Basic Books;; 2002
    Google Scholar
  • 51 Payne PR, Starren J. Quantifying visual similarity in clinical iconic graphics. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2005; 12: 338-345.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Gray J. The Hilbert challenge. Oxford: Oxford University Press;; 2001
    Google Scholar
  • 53 Haux R, Ammenwerth E, Herzog W, Knaup P. Health care in the information society. A prognosis for the year 2013. Int J Med Inform 2002; 66: 3-21 discussion 23-120.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Martin Sanchez F, Gray K, Bellazzi R, Lopez-Campos G. Exposome informatics: Considerations for the design of future biomedical research information systems. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2014; 21: 386-390.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Hamacher A, Kim SJ, Cho ST, Pardeshi S, Lee SH, Eun SJ, Whangbo TK. Application of virtual, augmented, and mixed reality to urology. Int Neurour-ol J 2016; 20: 172-181.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Moen A, Knudsen LMM. Nursing informatics -decades of contributions to health informatics. Healthcare Inf Res 2013; 19: 86-92.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Ludwig von Bertalanffy - passages from “General System Theory” (1968) [cited 2016 Sept 25]. Available from: http://www.panarchy.org/vonberta/lanffy/systems.1968.html.
    PubMed
  • 58 Wikipedia - Shannon-Weaver model. [cited 2016 Sept 25]. Available from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon%E2%80%93Weaver_model.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Newell A, Simon HA. Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall;; 1972
    Google Scholar
  • 60 Blois MS. Information and medicine: the nature of medical descriptions. Oakland, CA: University of California Press;; 1984
    Google Scholar
  • 61 Smith MJ, Liehr PR. editors. Middle range theory for nursing, 2nd ed. New York: Springer;; 2008
    Google Scholar
  • 62 Coiera E. When conversation is better than computation. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2000; 7: 277-286.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 63 Collins SA, Bakken S, Vawdrey DK, Coiera E, Cur-rie LM. Clinician preferences for verbal communication compared to EHR documentation in the ICU. Appl Clin Inform 2011; 2: 190-201.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 64 Collins SA, Bakken S, Vawdrey DK, Coiera E, Cur-rie LM. Agreement between common goals discussed and documented in the ICU. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2011; 18: 45-60.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 65 Collins SA, Mamykina L, Jordan D, Stein DM, Shine A, Reyfman P, Kaufman K. In search of common ground in handoff documentation in an intensive care unit. J Biomed Inform 2012; 45: 307-315.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 66 de Lusignan S, Crawford L, Munro N. Creating and using real-world evidence to answer questions about clinical effectiveness. J Innov Health Inform 2015; 22: 368-373.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 67 Liyanage H, Liaw ST, Kuziemsky C, Di Iorio CT, Schreiber R, Terry AL, de Lusignan S. Building a privacy, ethics and data access framework for real world computerised medical record system data: A Delphi study. A Contribution of the IMIA Primary Health Care Informatics Working Group. Yearb Med Inform 2016; 11: 11-18.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 68 Ibânez A, Larranaga P, Bielza C. Predicting citation count of bioinformatics papers within four yearsof publication. Bioinform 2009; 25: 3303-3309.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 69 Currie LM. Evaluation frameworks for nursing informatics. Int J Med Inform 2005; 74: 908-916.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 70 Gray K, Sockolow P. Conceptual models in health informatics research: A literature review and suggestions for development. JMIR Med Inform 2016; 4: e7.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 71 Gruber TR. A translation approach to portable ontology specification. Knowledge Acquisition 1993; 5: 199-220.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 72 Noy NF, McGuinness DL. Ontology development 101: A guide to creating your first ontology. 2001 [cited 2016 Sept 25]. Available from: http://pro-tege.stanford.edu/publications/ontology_develop-ment/ontology101-noy-mcguinness.html.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 73 Pigott K, de Lusignan S, Rapley A, Robinson J, Pritchard-Copley A. An informatics benchmarking statement. Methods Inf Med 2007; 46: 394-398.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 74 de Lusignan S. What is primary care informatics?. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2003; 10: 304-309.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 75 Lakoff G. Explaining Embodied Cognition Results. Topics in Cognitive Science 2012; 4: 773-785.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 76 de Lusignan S, Krause P. The Hayes principles: learning from the national pilot of information technology and core generalisable theory in informatics. Inform Prim Care 2010; 18: 73-77.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 77 Abbasi K. Compulsory registration of clinical trials. BMJ 2004; 329: 637-638.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 78 Marsh AA, Stoycos SA, Brethel-Haurwitz KM, Robinson P, VanMeter JW, Cardinale EM. Neural and cognitive characteristics of extraordinary altruists. PNAS 2014; 111: 15036-15041.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 79 Hutcherson C, Montaser Kouhsari L, Woodward J, Rangel A. Emotional and utilitarian appraisals of moral dilemmas are encoded in separate areas and integrated in ventromedial prefrontal cortex. J Neurosc 2015; 35: 12593-12605.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 80 Pigott K, de Lusignan S, Rapley A, Robinson J, Pritchard-Copley A. An informatics benchmarking statement. Methods Inf Med 2007; 46: 394-398.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 81 Merton K. Social theory and social structure. New York: Free Press;; 1968
    Google Scholar