One Health in a Digital World: Technology, Data, Information and Knowledge.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the origins and growth of the One Health concept and its recent application in One Digital Health. METHODS: Bibliometric review and critical discussion of emergent themes derived from co-occurrence of MeSH keywords. RESULTS: The fundamental interrelationship between human health, animal health and the wider environment has been recognized since ancient times. One Health as a distinct term originated in 2004 and has been a rapidly growing concept of interest in the biomedical literature since 2017. One Digital Health has quickly established itself as a unifying construct that highlights the critical role of technology, data, information and knowledge to facilitate the interdisciplinary collaboration that One Health requires. The principal application domains of One Digital Health to date are in FAIR data integration and analysis, disease surveillance, antimicrobial stewardship and environmental monitoring. CONCLUSIONS: One Health and One Digital Health offer powerful lenses to examine and address crises in our living world. We propose thinking in terms of Learning One Health Systems that can dynamically capture, integrate, analyse and monitor application of data across the biosphere.

Barriers, Priorities and Lessons Learned in Achieving Electronic Health Records Interoperability in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Workshop Findings.

Electronic health records (EHR) interoperability is a complex topic that continues to gain traction in the digital health landscape. We facilitated a qualitative workshop consisting of domain experts in EHR implementation and health IT managers. The workshop aimed to identify critical barriers to achieving interoperability, priorities for new EHR implementations and lessons learned from managing existing implementations. The workshop highlighted that data modelling and interoperability standards are vital priorities for maternal and child health data services in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

Protocol for a scoping review to understand how interorganisational electronic health records affect hospital physician and pharmacist decisions.

INTRODUCTION: Patient records are often fragmented across organisations and departments in UK health and care services, often due to substandard information technology. However, although government policy in the UK and internationally is strongly pushing 'digital transformation', the evidence for the positive impact of electronic information systems on cost, quality and safety of healthcare is far from clear. In particular, the mechanisms by which information availability is translated into better decision-making are not well understood. We do not know when a full interorganisational record is more useful than a key information summary or an institutional record. In this paper, we describe our scoping review of how interorganisational electronic health records affect decision-making by hospital physicians and pharmacists. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This scoping review will follow the Arksey and O'Malley (2005) methodology. The review has adopted sociotechnical systems thinking and the notion of distributed cognition as its guiding conceptual models. The UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Healthcare Databases Advanced Search will be used, as it incorporates key sources including PubMed, Medline, Embase, HMIC and Health Business Elite. A hand search will be conducted using the reference lists of included studies to identify additional relevant articles. A two-part study selection process will be used: (1) a title and abstract review and (2) full text review. During the first step, two researchers separately will review the citations yielded from the search to determine eligibility based on the defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Related articles will be included if they are empirical studies that address how interorganisational records affect decision-making by hospital physicians and pharmacists. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The results will be disseminated through stakeholder meetings, conference presentations and peer-reviewed publication. The data used are from publicly available secondary sources, so this study does not require ethical review.