Industry Forum - Pre-meeting questionnaire survey

Registered participants and non-participants are welcome to contribute.
The aggregated results will be shared during each panel session.

For each question please indicate your level of agreement with the statement on a scale of 1 to 9

*: required fields.

Personal Info

Email*:

Please can you provide your professional background (the best fit to your current role)

Panel I: Interoperability requirements for the delivery of integrated and person-centred care

1a. The structural and semantic standards we now have are sufficiently rich to support interoperable integrated care (i.e. we now have enough standards to address this need)

[NO, insufficient-------------------------YES, sufficient]

No opinion 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Your opinion (max. 200):

1b. A major barrier to the procurement and successful use of interoperable EHRs is the variability of clinical practice between specialities and countries

[NO, not a major barrier--------YES, a major barrier]

No opinion 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Your opinion (max. 200):

1c. A whole new wave of standards are needed to support interoperable personal health systems and PHRs

[NO, not needed-------------------------YES, needed]

No opinion 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Your opinion (max. 200):

Panel II: Importance of interoperability policies for healthcare payers, ministries and insurers

2a. Without major change to reimbursement models for care, healthcare providers have no incentives to invest in interoperable health ICT products

[NO, not needed-------------------------YES, needed]

No opinion 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Your opinion (max. 200):

2b. A major inhibitor of the interoperability market is that purchasers do not understand how to define the semantic interoperability functions they need clearly enough in procurement specifications

[NO, not a major inhibitor----YES, a major inhibitor]

No opinion 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Your opinion (max. 200):

2c. Vendor lock in remains a major disincentive for companies to provide open interfaces supporting EHR interoperability

[NO, not a major disincentive----YES, a major disincentive]

No opinion 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Your opinion (max. 200):

Panel III: Interoperability for large-scale clinical research, business intelligence and learning healthcare

3a. Industry and government investments in big data platforms and repositories offer significant new funds to stimulate the interoperability market within healthcare as well

[NO, will not stimulate-----------YES, will stimulate]

No opinion 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Your opinion (max. 200):

3b. The research requirements for interoperability are complementary to those for health care, and can use many of the same standards

[NO, need different standards-------YES, use the same standards]

No opinion 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Your opinion (max. 200):

3c. For discovery science and pragmatic drug trials, high-scale analysis of semantically-controlled phenotypes will create new high value market demand dependent on cross-system interoperability

[NO, new high value market unlikely----YES, new high value market very likely]

No opinion 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Your opinion (max. 200):

Panel IV: Interoperable Standards Development and Interoperability Profiling Organisations

4a. The presently available standards supporting semantic interoperability for health are too complex and still lack good domain coverage

[NO, now provide good coverage----YES, still lack good coverage]

No opinion 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Your opinion (max. 200):

4b. Health informatics standards are unnecessarily expensive for industry to adopt, in terms of time, skills and/or impact on existing products

[NO, not expensive----YES, unnecessarily expensive]

No opinion 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Your opinion (max. 200):

4c. Companies need to be more proactive in working with SDOs to ensure semantic interoperability standards are industry friendly and meet affordable market needs

[NO, engagement is sufficient----YES, need to engage more]

No opinion 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Your opinion (max. 200):

Captcha*: