Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: Journal of Medical Internet Research

Date Submitted: Feb 28, 2024
Date Accepted: Nov 25, 2024

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Assessing Digital Maturity of Hospitals: Viewpoint Comparing National Approaches in Five Countries

Cresswell K, Jahn F, Silsand L, Woods L, Postema T, Logan M, Malkic S

Assessing Digital Maturity of Hospitals: Viewpoint Comparing National Approaches in Five Countries

J Med Internet Res 2025;27:e57858

DOI: 10.2196/57858

PMID: 40053724

PMCID: 11926443

Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.

Assessing digital maturity of hospitals: Comparing national approaches in five countries

  • Kathrin Cresswell; 
  • Franziska Jahn; 
  • Line Silsand; 
  • Leanna Woods; 
  • Tim Postema; 
  • Marion Logan; 
  • Sevala Malkic

ABSTRACT

Background:

Digital maturity assessments can inform strategic decision making. However, national approaches to assessing digital maturity of health systems are in their infancy, and there is limited insight into context and processes associated with such assessments.

Objective:

To describe and compare national approaches to assessing digital maturity of hospitals.

Methods:

We performed a narrative review of five national approaches to assessing digital maturity of hospitals in Queensland (Australia), Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, and Scotland. Data was collected in narrative form exploring context, drivers, and approaches to measure digital maturity in each country. We then performed a qualitative thematic analysis to compare approaches with the help of NVivo 12 to facilitate coding.

Results:

We observed a common focus on interoperability, and assessment findings were used to shape national digital health strategies. Indicators were broadly aligned, but four of five countries developed their own tailored indicator sets. Key topic areas across countries included interoperability, capabilities, leadership, governance, and infrastructure. Analysis of indicators was centralised, but data was shared with participating organisations. Only one setting conducted an academic evaluation. Major challenges of digital maturity assessment included the high cost and time required for data collection, questions about measurement accuracy, difficulties in consistent long-term tracking of indicators, and potential biases due to self-reporting. We also observed tensions between practical feasibility of the process with the depth and breadth required by the complexity of the topic, and tensions between national and local data needs.

Conclusions:

There are several key challenges in national assessments of digital maturity in hospitals that influence the validity and reliability of outputs. These need to be explicitly acknowledged when making decisions informed by assessments and monitored over time.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Cresswell K, Jahn F, Silsand L, Woods L, Postema T, Logan M, Malkic S

Assessing Digital Maturity of Hospitals: Viewpoint Comparing National Approaches in Five Countries

J Med Internet Res 2025;27:e57858

DOI: 10.2196/57858

PMID: 40053724

PMCID: 11926443

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.