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, Casimir A. Kulikowski, Suzanne Bakken, Simon de Lusignan, Michio Kimura, Sabine Koch, John Mantas, Victor Maojo, Michael Marschollek, Fernando Martin-Sanchez, Anne Moen, Hyeoun Ae Park, Indra Neil Sarkar, Tze Yun Leong, Alexa T. McCray

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)e1-e10
JournalMethods of Information in Medicine
Volume56
Issue numberMethodsOpen
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2017

Fingerprint

Medical Informatics
Informatics
Biomedical Research
Health
Research
Delivery of Health Care
Research Design
Education

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Health Information Management
  • Health Informatics
  • Advanced and Specialized Nursing

Keywords

  • Biomedical informatics
  • Education
  • Health informatics
  • Medical informatics
  • Research

Cite this

Haux, Reinhold ; Kulikowski, Casimir A. ; Bakken, Suzanne ; de Lusignan, Simon ; Kimura, Michio ; Koch, Sabine ; Mantas, John ; Maojo, Victor ; Marschollek, Michael ; Martin-Sanchez, Fernando ; Moen, Anne ; Park, Hyeoun Ae ; Sarkar, Indra Neil ; Leong, Tze Yun ; McCray, Alexa T. / 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. In: Methods of Information in Medicine. 2017 ; Vol. 56, No. MethodsOpen. pp. e1-e10.
@article{4a1d92e7df004d3a818509005734ee49,
title = "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",
abstract = "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, Education, Health informatics, Medical informatics, Research",
author = "Reinhold Haux and Kulikowski, {Casimir A.} and Suzanne Bakken and {de Lusignan}, Simon and Michio Kimura and Sabine Koch and John Mantas and Victor Maojo and Michael Marschollek and Fernando Martin-Sanchez and Anne Moen and Park, {Hyeoun Ae} and Sarkar, {Indra Neil} and Leong, {Tze Yun} and McCray, {Alexa T.}",
year = "2017",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "https://doi.org/10.3414/ME16-01-0125",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "56",
pages = "e1--e10",
journal = "Methods of Information in Medicine",
issn = "0026-1270",
publisher = "Schattauer GmbH",
number = "MethodsOpen",

}

Haux, R, Kulikowski, CA, Bakken, S, de Lusignan, S, Kimura, M, Koch, S, Mantas, J, Maojo, V, Marschollek, M, Martin-Sanchez, F, Moen, A, Park, HA, Sarkar, IN, Leong, TY & McCray, AT 2017, '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', Methods of Information in Medicine, vol. 56, no. MethodsOpen, pp. e1-e10. https://doi.org/10.3414/ME16-01-0125

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. / Haux, Reinhold; Kulikowski, Casimir A.; Bakken, Suzanne; de Lusignan, Simon; Kimura, Michio; Koch, Sabine; Mantas, John; Maojo, Victor; Marschollek, Michael; Martin-Sanchez, Fernando; Moen, Anne; Park, Hyeoun Ae; Sarkar, Indra Neil; Leong, Tze Yun; McCray, Alexa T.

In: Methods of Information in Medicine, Vol. 56, No. MethodsOpen, 01.01.2017, p. e1-e10.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Research strategies for biomedical and health informatics

T2 - Some thought-provoking and critical proposals to encourage scientific debate on the nature of good research in medical informatics

AU - Haux, Reinhold

AU - Kulikowski, Casimir A.

AU - Bakken, Suzanne

AU - de Lusignan, Simon

AU - Kimura, Michio

AU - Koch, Sabine

AU - Mantas, John

AU - Maojo, Victor

AU - Marschollek, Michael

AU - Martin-Sanchez, Fernando

AU - Moen, Anne

AU - Park, Hyeoun Ae

AU - Sarkar, Indra Neil

AU - Leong, Tze Yun

AU - McCray, Alexa T.

PY - 2017/1/1

Y1 - 2017/1/1

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

KW - Biomedical informatics

KW - Education

KW - Health informatics

KW - Medical informatics

KW - Research

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85022205225&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85022205225&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - https://doi.org/10.3414/ME16-01-0125

DO - https://doi.org/10.3414/ME16-01-0125

M3 - Article

C2 - 28119991

VL - 56

SP - e1-e10

JO - Methods of Information in Medicine

JF - Methods of Information in Medicine

SN - 0026-1270

IS - MethodsOpen

ER -