The Road to Professionalism in Medical Informatics: A Proposal for Debate

Abstract:

Medical Informatics has not as yet reached professional status. However, as an expanding and increasingly important discipline in the delivery of healthcare, it is important that it strives towards professionalisation. In this article we consider the nature of professionalism, its potential benefits and associated costs. We examine the potential for Medical Informatics to become a professional discipline and how far it has succeeded in this to date, describing three possible scenarios for the future of the discipline. We suggest steps towards the professionalisation of Medical Informatics and the roles of key players, including academia, system developers, purchasers and users, and professional societies. We also put forward some possible criteria for a Medical Informatics Professional. Finally, we make some general observations concerning the way forward.

Keywords:

Medical Informatics - Professionalism - Education - System Development

• References

• 1 McDermid JA. ed. Software Engineers Reference Book. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd; 1991
• 2 Peel VJ. Management-focused health informatics research and education at the University of Manchester. Meth Inform Med 1994; 33: 273-7.
• 3 Kaplan B, Maxwell JA. Qualitative research methods for evaluating computer information systems. In: Anderson JG, Aydin CE, Jay SJ. eds. Evaluating Health Care Information Systems. 45-68 SAGE publications; 1994
• 4 Brahams D, Wyatt J. Decision-aids and the law. Lancet 1989; 2: 632-4.
• 5 Schwartz WB. Medicine and the computer: The promise and problems of change. N Eng J Med 1970; 283: 1257-64.
• 6 Shortliffe EH. MYCIN: Computer-based Medical Consultations. New York: American Elsevier; 1975
• 7 Miller RA, Pople HE, Myers JD. INTERNIST-1, an experimental computer-based diagnostic consultant for general internal medicine. N Eng J Med 1982; 307: 468-76.
• 8 Wyatt J. Computer-based knowledge systems. Lancet 1991; 338: 1431-6.
• 9 Shortliffe EH, Perrault LE, Wiederhold G, Fagan L. eds. Medical Informatics. Computer Applications in Health Care. New York: Addison-Wesley Publ Comp; 1990
• 10 Wyatt J, Spiegelhalter D. Evaluating medical expert systems: what to test and how. Med Inform 1990; 15: 205-17.
• 11 Veradaguer A, Patak J, Sancho J, Sierra C, Sanz F. Validation of the medical expert system PNEUMON-1A. In: Van Bemmel JH, McCray AT. eds. Yearbook of Medical Informatics 1993. Stuttgart – New York: Schattauer; 1993: 446-61.
• 12 Marr PB, Duthie E, Glassman KS. et al. Bedside terminal and quality of nursing documentation. In: Van Bemmel JH, McCray AT. eds. Yearbook of Medical Informatics 1994. Stuttgart – New York: Schattauer; 1994: 241-7.
• 13 Nygren E, Henriksson P. Reading the medical record. I. Comput Meth Prog Biomed 1992; 39: 1-12.
• 14 Forsythe DE. Using ethnography to build a working system: Rethinking basic design assumptions. In: Frisse ME. ed. Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Symposium on Computer Applications in Medical Care. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1993: 505-9.
• 15 Heathfield HA, Hardiker N, Kirby J, Tallis R, Gonsalkarale M. The PEN & PAD medical record model: A report of its use in the development of a clinical record system for hospital-based care of the elderly. Meth Inform Med 1194; 33: 464-72.
• 16 Van der Lei J, Musen MA. A model for critiquing based on automated medical records. Compat Biomed Res 1991; 24: 344-78.
• 17 Musen MA, Carlson RW, Fagan LW, Deresinski SC, Shortliffe EH. T-HELPER: Automated support for community-based clinical research. In: Frisse ME. ed. Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Symposium on Computer Applications in Medical Care. New York: MacGraw Hill; 1993: 719-23.
• 18 Kassirer J, Gorry G. Clinical decision analysis. Ann Intern Med 1978; 89: 245-55.
• 19 Tversky A, Kahneman D. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science 1974; 185: 1124.
• 20 Rector AL, Nowlan WA, Kay S, Goble CA, Howkins TJ. A framework for modelling the electronic patient record. Meth Inform Med 1993; 32: 109-19.
• 21 Fox J. Decision-support systems as safetycritical components: towards a safety culture for medical informatics. Meth Inform Med 1993; 32: 345-8.
• 22 Haux R, Leven FJ. Twenty years medical informatics education at Heidelberg/Heilbronn: Evolution of a specialised curriculum. In: Van Bemmel JH, McCray AT. eds. Yearbook of Medical Informatics 1994. Stuttgart – New York: Schattauer; 1994: III-6.
• 23 Ioyce E. Software bugs: a matter of life and liability. Datamation 1987; 33: 88-92.
• 24 Anon. Medical Informatics (editorial). Lancet 1990; 335: 824-5.
• 25 Sears-Williams L. Microchip vs stethoscopes: Calgary hospital MDs face off over controversial computer system. Canadian Med Assoc J 1992; 147: 1534-47.
• 26 Heathfield HA, Wyatt J. Medical Informatics: Hiding our light under a bushel, or the emperor’s new clothes?. Meth Inform Med 1993; 32: 181-2.
• 27 Carey T, Thomas D, Woolsey A. et al. Half a loaf is better than waiting for the bread truck: a computerised mini-medical record for outpatient care. Arch Int Med 1992; 152: 1845-9.
• 28 Smith AP. How to do it: design an information system. BMJ 1992; 305: 415-7.
• 29 Wyatt JC. Use of medical knowledge systems: lessons from computerised ECG interpreters. In: Barahona P, Christensen J. eds. Knowledge and Decisions in Health Telematics. Amsterdam: IOS Press; 1994: 73-80.
• 30 Wyatt JC. Clinical data systems, Part III: Developing and evaluating clinical data systems. Lancet 1994; 344: 1682-8.
• 31 Heathfield HA. Decision Support Systems (Synopsis). In: Van Bemmel JH, McCray AT. eds. Yearbook of Medical Informatics, 1995. Stuttgart – New York: Schattauer; 1995: 455-7.