Other Documents

From Nhs It Info

(Difference between revisions)
(Other Documents)
Line 1: Line 1:
-
===Other Documents===
+
===Implementing Information for Health: Even More Challenging Than Expected (10 Jun 2002)===
-
[http://hinf.uvic.ca/archives/Protti.pdf Implementing Information for Health: Even More Challenging THan Expected] (10 Jun 2002) by Prof. Dennis Protti - "Over the period 6th August to 19th October 2001, and at the invitation of the heads of the Information Policy Unit (IPU) of the Department of Health and the NHS Information Authority, I once again visited England to review the state of progress of Information for Health, taking account of the implications of the emerging changes within the UK health care system. Returning to the UK, it did not take me long to realise that the NHS was once again in the midst of a significant period of transition.  It was evident, even to an outsider, that the United Kingdom has a Government which believes that the NHS has to be re-organised and made to be more equitable, accountable, and customer-focused.  I sensed that it is a Government that is looking for obvious progress in reforming the public sector - spurred on in particular by negative media coverage about the NHS. In its recent policy document, Shifting the Balance of Power in the NHS (StBOP), the Government expresses its desire to devolve power and decision-making down to the frontline, to decentralise, to provide patients with choice, to give local staff the resources and the freedoms to innovate, develop and improve local services. This desire pervades the changes I observed and sets the tone for my report – these are fascinating, if somewhat daunting, times for the NHS. . ."
+
<i>School of Health Information scince, University of Victoria</i>
-
[http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/economic_data_and_tools/greenbook/data_greenbook_index.cfm Green Book, Appraisal and evaluation in central government] (16 Jan 2003) - "Information is needed for a market to operate efficiently. Buyers need to know the quality of the good or service to judge the value of the benefit it can provide. Sellers, lenders and investors need to know the reliability of a buyer, borrower or entrepreneur. This information must be available fully to both sides of the market, and where it is not, market failure may result. This is known as 'asymmetry of information' and can arise in situations where, for example, sellers have
+
http://hinf.uvic.ca/archives/Protti.pdf
 +
 
 +
By Prof. Dennis Protti - "Over the period 6th August to 19th October 2001, and at the invitation of the heads of the Information Policy Unit (IPU) of the Department of Health and the NHS Information Authority, I once again visited England to review the state of progress of Information for Health, taking account of the implications of the emerging changes within the UK health care system. Returning to the UK, it did not take me long to realise that the NHS was once again in the midst of a significant period of transition.  It was evident, even to an outsider, that the United Kingdom has a Government which believes that the NHS has to be re-organised and made to be more equitable, accountable, and customer-focused.  I sensed that it is a Government that is looking for obvious progress in reforming the public sector - spurred on in particular by negative media coverage about the NHS. In its recent policy document, Shifting the Balance of Power in the NHS (StBOP), the Government expresses its desire to devolve power and decision-making down to the frontline, to decentralise, to provide patients with choice, to give local staff the resources and the freedoms to innovate, develop and improve local services. This desire pervades the changes I observed and sets the tone for my report – these are fascinating, if somewhat daunting, times for the NHS. . ."
 +
 
 +
===Green Book, Appraisal and evaluation in central government (16 Jan 2003)===
 +
 
 +
<i>HM Treasury</i>
 +
 
 +
http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/economic_data_and_tools/greenbook/data_greenbook_index.cfm
 +
 
 +
"Information is needed for a market to operate efficiently. Buyers need to know the quality of the good or service to judge the value of the benefit it can provide. Sellers, lenders and investors need to know the reliability of a buyer, borrower or entrepreneur. This information must be available fully to both sides of the market, and where it is not, market failure may result. This is known as 'asymmetry of information' and can arise in situations where, for example, sellers have
information that buyers don't (or vice versa) about some aspect of product or service quality. Information asymmetry can restrict the quality of the good traded, resulting in 'adverse selection'. Another possible situation is where a contract or relationship places incentives upon one party to take (or not take) unobservable steps that are prejudicial to another party. This is known as 'moral hazard', an example of which is the tendency of people with insurance to reduce the care they take to avoid or reduce insured losses." [The CfH team admitted at our meeting in April that there was a considerable amount that they did not know about the technical details of the systems they were buying. Indeed, the whole nature of output-based specification
information that buyers don't (or vice versa) about some aspect of product or service quality. Information asymmetry can restrict the quality of the good traded, resulting in 'adverse selection'. Another possible situation is where a contract or relationship places incentives upon one party to take (or not take) unobservable steps that are prejudicial to another party. This is known as 'moral hazard', an example of which is the tendency of people with insurance to reduce the care they take to avoid or reduce insured losses." [The CfH team admitted at our meeting in April that there was a considerable amount that they did not know about the technical details of the systems they were buying. Indeed, the whole nature of output-based specification
(OBS) seems to ensure information asymmetry and moral hazard as defined below.]
(OBS) seems to ensure information asymmetry and moral hazard as defined below.]
-
[http://www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/POSTpn214.pdf New NHS IT] An an accurate,
+
===New NHS IT (Feb 2004)===
-
brief and clear summary of the situation at the time of writing (Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, Feb 2004)
+
 
 +
<i>Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology</i>
 +
 
 +
http://www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/POSTpn214.pdf  
 +
 
 +
An an accurate, brief and clear summary of the situation at the time of writing.
 +
 
 +
===The Spine, an English national programme (25 Mar 2005)===
 +
 
 +
<i>Ringholm White Paper</i>
 +
 
 +
http://www.ringholm.de/docs/00970_en.htm
 +
 
 +
A clear description of the Spine
 +
 
 +
===Transformational Government: Enabled by Technology (Nov 2005)===
 +
 
 +
<i>Cabinet Office Report</i>
 +
 
 +
http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgov-strategy.pdf
 +
 
 +
===System Design Or Social Change (6 Apr 2006)===
 +
 
 +
<i>Parliamentary IT Committee (PITCOM) on the subject of Public Sector 'IT' procurement</i>
 +
 
 +
http://www.pitcom.org.uk/reports/Malcolm-Mills-talk.doc
 +
 
 +
Submission by Malcolm Mills: ". . . I suggest three things. Immediately, to increase the success rate and restore confidence, I would simplify, de-risk and specify a more evolutionary set of requirements for endeavours of this kind. I would then increase their delivery time-scales to be more in keeping with the much longer timeframes we know from experience are associated with achieving successful social change. In the medium term, I would do two things:
 +
Recognising that the major risks, and by far the greater costs, lie with the addressing people issues, and not technology ones, HM Treasury should commission new ‘Green Book’ appraisal guidelines for scrutinising the budgeting and planning of socio-technical endeavours during the Gateway decision-making process. And finally, faced with clear evidence of an acute shortage of interdisciplinary skills and competences in Government and Industry to design and manage the range of socio-technical systems in the public programme, a task force should be established to examine how the Nation might produce a sufficient number of competent and skilled people able to lead, develop, and then support, such critical endeavours. . ."
 +
 
 +
 
 +
===Guidance for NHS Foundation Trusts on Co-operating with the National Programme for  Information Technology (12 April 2006)===
 +
 
 +
Monitor, Independent Regulator of NHS Trusts
 +
 
 +
http://www.e-health-insider.com/tc_domainsBin/Document_Library0282/NPfIT_guidance_Final_120406.pdf?
 +
 
 +
===NHS IT chief meets criticism head-on (25 May 2006)===
 +
 
 +
<i>Computing</i>
 +
 
 +
http://www.computing.co.uk/computing/analysis/2156832/nhs-chief-meets-criticism-head
 +
 
 +
Interview with Richard Granger.
 +
 
 +
==='Computer says no' to Mr Blair's botched £20bn NHS upgrade (4 Jun 2006)===
 +
 
 +
<i>Sunday Telegraph</i>
 +
 
 +
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/06/04/nhs04.xml
 +
 
 +
===Granger: bricks of the digital NHS coming together (16 Jun 2006)===
 +
 
 +
<i>e-Health Insider</i>
 +
 
 +
http://www.e-health-insider.com/news/item.cfm?ID=1949
 +
 
 +
Richard Granger interview.
 +
 
 +
===Information Governance in NHS's NPfIT: A case for Policy Specification (2006)===
 +
 
 +
Moritz Y. Becker, Microsoft Research (To appear in International Journal of Medical Informatics, 2006.)
 +
 
 +
http://www2.cantabgold.net/users/m.y.becker.98/publications/becker06ijmi.pdf
 +
 
 +
Plundering_The_Public_Sector
 +
 
 +
Extracts from the book by David Craig, provided here with the author's and publisher's permission.
 +
 
 +
===NHS IT systems crisis: the story so far (30 Aug 2006)===
 +
 
 +
<i>Computer Business Review</i>
 +
 
 +
http://www.cbronline.com/article_cbr.asp?guid=35AC0F09-6C33-4D0E-AC2C-D912E2AA6042 
 +
 
 +
"The NHS's Connecting for Health plan to update and link up health service systems have hit the headlines in recent weeks thanks to reported problems with key software supplier iSoft, and criticisms of the project's management and cost. CBR has been tracking the project since its creation, and in this article has brought together the story so far, beginning with the handing out of contracts in late 2003. . ."
 +
 
 +
http://europa.eu.int/information_society/activities/health/docs/publications/ehealthimpactsept2006.pdf eHealth is Worth it
 +
 
 +
===An assessment of "The economic benefits of implemented eHealth solutions at ten European sites (Sep 2006)===
-
[http://www.ringholm.de/docs/00970_en.htm The Spine, an English national programme] - a Ringholm White Paper, describing the Spine (25 Mar 2005)
+
European Commission, Directorate General Information Society and Media, ICT for Health Unit
-
[http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgov-strategy.pdf Transformational Government: Enabled by Technology] - a Cabinet Office Report (Nov 2005)
+
===Dying for Data (Oct 2006)===
-
[http://www.pitcom.org.uk/reports/Malcolm-Mills-talk.doc System Design Or Social Change] - submission by Malcolm Mills to the Parliamentary IT Committee (PITCOM) on the subject of Public Sector 'IT' procurement (6 Apr 2006)
+
IEEE Spectrum
-
[http://www.e-health-insider.com/tc_domainsBin/Document_Library0282/NPfIT_guidance_Final_120406.pdf? Guidance for NHS Foundation Trusts on Co-operating with the National Programme for  Information Technology] - Monitor, Independent Regulator of NHS Trusts (12 April 2006)
+
http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/oct06/4589
-
[http://www.computing.co.uk/computing/analysis/2156832/nhs-chief-meets-criticism-head NHS IT chief meets criticism head-on] - interview with Richard Granger in Computing, 25 May 2006
+
"A comprehensive system of electronic medical records promises to save lives and cut health care costs—but how do you build one?" (Robert N. Charette)
-
[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/06/04/nhs04.xml 'Computer says no' to Mr Blair's botched £20bn NHS upgrade] - Sunday Telegraph, 4 June 2006
+
===‘Gung-ho' attitude scuppers public-sector IT projects (2 Oct 2006)===
-
[http://www.e-health-insider.com/news/item.cfm?ID=1949 Granger: bricks of the digital NHS coming together] - Richard Granger interview, E-Health Insider, 16 June 2006
+
<i>Computer Weekly</i>
-
[http://www2.cantabgold.net/users/m.y.becker.98/publications/becker06ijmi.pdf Information Governance in NHS's NPfIT: A case for Policy Specification] - Moritz Y. Becker, Microsoft Research (To appear in International Journal of Medical Informatics, 2006.)
+
http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2006/10/02/218832/%e2%80%98Gung-ho'+attitude+scuppers+public-sector+IT+projects.htm
-
[[Plundering_The_Public_Sector]] - extracts from the book by David Craig, provided here with the author's and publisher's permission.
+
"Government IT heads’ ‘gung-ho’ and reckless attitudes to risk is wasting millions of taxpayer money on over-complex, poorly tested systems, according to a think-tank study. Contrary to the stereotype, many public-sector managers have a ‘reckless streak’ and are dazzled by the potential of the technology, according to the [http://www.theworkfoundation.com/Assets/PDFs/adobe5b.pdf Where next for  transformational government?] report by The Work Foundation, (September 2006)"
-
[http://www.cbronline.com/article_cbr.asp?guid=35AC0F09-6C33-4D0E-AC2C-D912E2AA6042  NHS IT systems crisis: the story so far] (Computer Business Review, 30 Aug 2006) "The NHS's Connecting for Health plan to update and link up health service systems have hit the headlines in recent weeks thanks to reported problems with key software supplier iSoft, and criticisms of the project's management and cost. CBR has been tracking the project since its creation, and in this article has brought together the story so far, beginning with the handing out of contracts in late 2003. . ."
+
===What CfH Could and Should Learn from Defence Procurement (Oct 2006)===
-
[http://europa.eu.int/information_society/activities/health/docs/publications/ehealthimpactsept2006.pdf eHealth is Worth it] - An assessment of "The economic benefits of implemented eHealth solutions at ten European sites" (European Commission, Directorate General Information Society and Media, ICT for Health Unit, September 2006)
+
Malcolm Mills
-
[http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/oct06/4589 Dying for Data] Subtitle: "A comprehensive system of electronic medical records promises to save lives and cut health care costs—but how do you build one?" (Robert N. Charette. IEEE Spectrum, Oct 2006)
+
===IT and Modernisation (9 Oct 2006)===
-
[http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2006/10/02/218832/%e2%80%98Gung-ho'+attitude+scuppers+public-sector+IT+projects.htm ‘Gung-ho' attitude scuppers public-sector IT projects] (Computer Weekly, 2 Oct 2006) - "Government IT heads’ ‘gung-ho’ and reckless attitudes to risk is wasting millions of taxpayer money on over-complex, poorly tested systems, according to a think-tank study. Contrary to the stereotype, many public-sector managers have a ‘reckless streak’ and are dazzled by the potential of the technology, according to the [http://www.theworkfoundation.com/Assets/PDFs/adobe5b.pdf Where next for  transformational government?] report by The Work Foundation, (September 2006)"
+
http://www.newstatesman.com/pdf/itmodernisation2006.pdf  
-
[[What CfH Could and Should Learn from Defence Procurement]] - by Malcolm Mills (October 2006)
+
<i>New Statesman</i>
-
[http://www.newstatesman.com/pdf/itmodernisation2006.pdf IT and Modernisation] - New Statesman Round Table Discussion (9 Oct 2006)
+
New Statesman Round Table Discussion

Revision as of 14:46, 4 December 2006

Contents

Implementing Information for Health: Even More Challenging Than Expected (10 Jun 2002)

School of Health Information scince, University of Victoria

http://hinf.uvic.ca/archives/Protti.pdf

By Prof. Dennis Protti - "Over the period 6th August to 19th October 2001, and at the invitation of the heads of the Information Policy Unit (IPU) of the Department of Health and the NHS Information Authority, I once again visited England to review the state of progress of Information for Health, taking account of the implications of the emerging changes within the UK health care system. Returning to the UK, it did not take me long to realise that the NHS was once again in the midst of a significant period of transition. It was evident, even to an outsider, that the United Kingdom has a Government which believes that the NHS has to be re-organised and made to be more equitable, accountable, and customer-focused. I sensed that it is a Government that is looking for obvious progress in reforming the public sector - spurred on in particular by negative media coverage about the NHS. In its recent policy document, Shifting the Balance of Power in the NHS (StBOP), the Government expresses its desire to devolve power and decision-making down to the frontline, to decentralise, to provide patients with choice, to give local staff the resources and the freedoms to innovate, develop and improve local services. This desire pervades the changes I observed and sets the tone for my report – these are fascinating, if somewhat daunting, times for the NHS. . ."

Green Book, Appraisal and evaluation in central government (16 Jan 2003)

HM Treasury

http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/economic_data_and_tools/greenbook/data_greenbook_index.cfm

"Information is needed for a market to operate efficiently. Buyers need to know the quality of the good or service to judge the value of the benefit it can provide. Sellers, lenders and investors need to know the reliability of a buyer, borrower or entrepreneur. This information must be available fully to both sides of the market, and where it is not, market failure may result. This is known as 'asymmetry of information' and can arise in situations where, for example, sellers have information that buyers don't (or vice versa) about some aspect of product or service quality. Information asymmetry can restrict the quality of the good traded, resulting in 'adverse selection'. Another possible situation is where a contract or relationship places incentives upon one party to take (or not take) unobservable steps that are prejudicial to another party. This is known as 'moral hazard', an example of which is the tendency of people with insurance to reduce the care they take to avoid or reduce insured losses." [The CfH team admitted at our meeting in April that there was a considerable amount that they did not know about the technical details of the systems they were buying. Indeed, the whole nature of output-based specification (OBS) seems to ensure information asymmetry and moral hazard as defined below.]

New NHS IT (Feb 2004)

Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology

http://www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/POSTpn214.pdf

An an accurate, brief and clear summary of the situation at the time of writing.

The Spine, an English national programme (25 Mar 2005)

Ringholm White Paper

http://www.ringholm.de/docs/00970_en.htm

A clear description of the Spine

Transformational Government: Enabled by Technology (Nov 2005)

Cabinet Office Report

http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgov-strategy.pdf

System Design Or Social Change (6 Apr 2006)

Parliamentary IT Committee (PITCOM) on the subject of Public Sector 'IT' procurement

http://www.pitcom.org.uk/reports/Malcolm-Mills-talk.doc

Submission by Malcolm Mills: ". . . I suggest three things. Immediately, to increase the success rate and restore confidence, I would simplify, de-risk and specify a more evolutionary set of requirements for endeavours of this kind. I would then increase their delivery time-scales to be more in keeping with the much longer timeframes we know from experience are associated with achieving successful social change. In the medium term, I would do two things: Recognising that the major risks, and by far the greater costs, lie with the addressing people issues, and not technology ones, HM Treasury should commission new ‘Green Book’ appraisal guidelines for scrutinising the budgeting and planning of socio-technical endeavours during the Gateway decision-making process. And finally, faced with clear evidence of an acute shortage of interdisciplinary skills and competences in Government and Industry to design and manage the range of socio-technical systems in the public programme, a task force should be established to examine how the Nation might produce a sufficient number of competent and skilled people able to lead, develop, and then support, such critical endeavours. . ."


Guidance for NHS Foundation Trusts on Co-operating with the National Programme for Information Technology (12 April 2006)

Monitor, Independent Regulator of NHS Trusts

http://www.e-health-insider.com/tc_domainsBin/Document_Library0282/NPfIT_guidance_Final_120406.pdf?

NHS IT chief meets criticism head-on (25 May 2006)

Computing

http://www.computing.co.uk/computing/analysis/2156832/nhs-chief-meets-criticism-head

Interview with Richard Granger.

'Computer says no' to Mr Blair's botched £20bn NHS upgrade (4 Jun 2006)

Sunday Telegraph

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/06/04/nhs04.xml

Granger: bricks of the digital NHS coming together (16 Jun 2006)

e-Health Insider

http://www.e-health-insider.com/news/item.cfm?ID=1949

Richard Granger interview.

Information Governance in NHS's NPfIT: A case for Policy Specification (2006)

Moritz Y. Becker, Microsoft Research (To appear in International Journal of Medical Informatics, 2006.)

http://www2.cantabgold.net/users/m.y.becker.98/publications/becker06ijmi.pdf

Plundering_The_Public_Sector

Extracts from the book by David Craig, provided here with the author's and publisher's permission.

NHS IT systems crisis: the story so far (30 Aug 2006)

Computer Business Review

http://www.cbronline.com/article_cbr.asp?guid=35AC0F09-6C33-4D0E-AC2C-D912E2AA6042

"The NHS's Connecting for Health plan to update and link up health service systems have hit the headlines in recent weeks thanks to reported problems with key software supplier iSoft, and criticisms of the project's management and cost. CBR has been tracking the project since its creation, and in this article has brought together the story so far, beginning with the handing out of contracts in late 2003. . ."

http://europa.eu.int/information_society/activities/health/docs/publications/ehealthimpactsept2006.pdf eHealth is Worth it

An assessment of "The economic benefits of implemented eHealth solutions at ten European sites (Sep 2006)

European Commission, Directorate General Information Society and Media, ICT for Health Unit

Dying for Data (Oct 2006)

IEEE Spectrum

http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/oct06/4589

"A comprehensive system of electronic medical records promises to save lives and cut health care costs—but how do you build one?" (Robert N. Charette)

‘Gung-ho' attitude scuppers public-sector IT projects (2 Oct 2006)

Computer Weekly

http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2006/10/02/218832/%e2%80%98Gung-ho'+attitude+scuppers+public-sector+IT+projects.htm

"Government IT heads’ ‘gung-ho’ and reckless attitudes to risk is wasting millions of taxpayer money on over-complex, poorly tested systems, according to a think-tank study. Contrary to the stereotype, many public-sector managers have a ‘reckless streak’ and are dazzled by the potential of the technology, according to the Where next for transformational government? report by The Work Foundation, (September 2006)"

What CfH Could and Should Learn from Defence Procurement (Oct 2006)

Malcolm Mills

IT and Modernisation (9 Oct 2006)

http://www.newstatesman.com/pdf/itmodernisation2006.pdf

New Statesman

New Statesman Round Table Discussion

Personal tools