Talk:Health information exchange

List of United states HIES

Missouri Health Connection changed their name to Midwest Health Connection in 2019

MHIN has merged with IHIE and should be consolidated within the description of IHIE's capabilities & coverage across Indiana. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.83.120.154 (talk) 22:03, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Varying levels of utility and usefulness

Indiana should be the first listed, because it is far and away the most frequently mentioned of all the HIE's out there. NPOV: I work in health informatics but I am not biased for/against Indiana. I wonder how much the other HIE's are actually in a state of "meaningful use". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.207.93.61 (talk) 11:52, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Need to Improve Quality of HIE Description

I think this entry doesn't do an adequate job of explaining the concept to those who aren't already familiar with it. Could we consider moving up the description of the problem that HIE solves? The Emergency room example is a good one. Another might be one of visiting one doctor, having lab tests done, then going to another and having the same lab tests repeated because it's easier for the second doctor to get new results than get the existing ones from the earlier doctor. HIE hopes to address problems like this. Ndrwclrk (talk) 20:10, 26 September 2009 (UTC). I agree with Ndrwclrk --Steve Steve.laramie (talk) 10:53, 18 July 2010 (PST).

I think HIE needs a comprehensive definition in both business and technical contexts. The business aspect of HIE is to facilitate the capability of collaboration among physicians, clinicians, hospitals, pharmacies, laboratories, or any health organization exchanging patient information in a faster mechanism for a meaningful use in order to improve patient care. The technical aspect of HIE is to provide a secured platform for sharing the patient information electronically with standardization, harmonization, normalization and aggregation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pisapatis (talk • contribs) 09:26, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Question of Merging [Health Information Exchange] Into Other Topics

I do not think this article should be merged into [Health Informatics] or [Electronic Health Records]. I agree that the entry needs to be improved to better describe what HIE is, but it is a distinct entity that deserves its own treatment here. Steve.laramie (talk) 10:53, 18 July 2010 (PST)

I support the above. - HIEs are separate entities unto themselves and while supporting Healthcare Informatics and Electronic Health records they are larger than either and incorporate both within their own scope. Yes, the three subjects should be linked but not merged. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.28.110.141 (talk) 18:14, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

I support the above also - HIE is a separate topic and concept. While there may be some overlap between HIE and the other articles, I think it is most helpful to leave this separate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MissionInn.Jim (talk • contribs) 21:52, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Verifiability

I do not believe this currently meets the standard of verifiability. At the very least it needs a link. But, to be valuable I think we need more information about the study. How it was conducted, who the results may be extrapolated to, that sort of thing. But I think the point that exchanging paper records is expensive should be retained. However, we should also probably add a reminder that electronic records and interfaces can be at least as expensive if not more than paper records for single-clinician practice in pure dollar terms.

According to an internal study at Sushoo Health Information Exchange, the current method of exchanging patients' health information accounts for approximately $17,160 of expenses annually for a single-clinician practice.

NoahSmithwicks (talk) 15:19, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

I agree, at this point the source links to SUshoo HIE's website and I am inclined to think that this is just a shameless plug rather than an actual source of the information. Plus, the link is to their home page, not the source of the article and doesn't provide verifiability. Saurabh Rahurkar (talk) 07:58, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Inclusion of the eHealth Exchange

I think at this point leaving out the eHealth Exchange or the Sequoia Project (formerly the NwHIN) is probably the largest network and should be mentioned especially given its topical relevance currently. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saurabh Rahurkar (talk • contribs) 08:13, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Health information exchange. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110209220531/http://healthit.hhs.gov:80/portal/server.pt?open=512&objID=1488&parentname=CommunityPage&parentid=58&mode=2&in_hi_userid=11113&cached=true to http://healthit.hhs.gov/portal/server.pt?open=512&objID=1488&parentname=CommunityPage&parentid=58&mode=2&in_hi_userid=11113&cached=true
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100420005847/http://healthit.hhs.gov:80/portal/server.pt?open=512&objID=1325&parentname=CommunityPage&parentid=1&mode=2 to http://healthit.hhs.gov/portal/server.pt?open=512&objID=1325&parentname=CommunityPage&parentid=1&mode=2

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:13, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Split proposed

The list of US health information exchanges currently dominates this article. I think this section is a good candidate for a stand-alone list, and that splitting it to a separate article will make this article easier to globalize. —Shelley V. Adams ‹blame
credit› 13:50, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Requested input from relevant Wikiprojects, see § Splitting List of US health information exchanges from main article at these talk pages:

• WikiProject Medicine
• WikiProject Health and fitness
• WikiProject United States

—Shelley V. Adams ‹blame
credit› 14:24, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

ShelleyAdams Why keep it at all? Why not delete it? The list is not maintained with references to any reliable sources. It is a list of non-notable products which do not have their own Wikipedia articles. These products go into and out of existence regularly. What value is there in keeping them at all?

I say delete them, and only create a list if someone identifies reliable sources of information which both keep such a list up-to-date and give some commentary on the usefulness of maintaining such a list. Without citations the list article would fail Wikipedia's basic inclusion criteria for having a standalone article. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:01, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

@Bluerasberry: The lack of references is definitely a concern. I'm currently cleaning up and adding citations. Regarding the longevity of these organizations — many (if not most) are rather new; their start-up was funded by the 2009 HITECH Act. However, others — I don't yet know how many — are older and stable. For example, Michiana Health Information Network pre-dates the HITECH Act by over 10 years. I recognize small organizations may appear and quickly merge or shutdown, but the larger state-wide and multi-state exchanges should be fairly durable. —Shelley V. Adams ‹blame
credit› 16:36, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

ShelleyAdams I support the list being removed. I have doubts that the list merits its own article, just because Wikipedia is supposed to mirror existing sources and I doubt that anyone else is maintaining this sort of list. It might be useful information if it existed but Wikipedia is not the place to do the extraordinary labor of compiling such a list without useful journalistic context. Still - if you want to give a go at splitting the article, try, but if you decide it is easier for you to delete content outright then you have my support. Blue Rasberry (talk) 20:50, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

• [1] a lot of unsourced text maybe delete that part--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 18:18, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Health information exchange. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130501055428/http://www.thedenverchannel.com/lifestyle/health/colorado-regional-health-information-organizations-network-helps-doctors-find-patients-information to http://www.thedenverchannel.com/lifestyle/health/colorado-regional-health-information-organizations-network-helps-doctors-find-patients-information

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:41, 14 September 2017 (UTC)