What is the difference between an electronic health record and an electronic medical record brainly

1. Dick RS, Steen B, Detmer DE (eds). The Computer-Based Patient Record. An Essential Technology for Health Care. Revised edition. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1997

2. NHS Executive Information for health. An information strategy for the modern NHS 1998–2005. A national strategy for local implementation. Great Britain: Wetherby, September 1998.

3. Mikkelsen G, Aasly J. Concordance of information in parallel electronic and paper based patient record. Int J Med Inform. 2001; 63:123–31. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

4. Nygren E, Johnson M, Henriksson P. Reading the medical record II. Design of a human-computer interface for basic reading of computerized medical records. Comput Methods Progr Biomed. 1992; 39:13–25. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

5. Tange HJ. The paper-based patient record: is it really so bad? In: Barahona P, Veloso M, Bryant J (eds). Proceedings of the Twelfth International Congress of the European Federation for Medical Informatics. Lisbon, 1994, pp 459–63.

6. Deutsche Krankenhausgesellschaft, Spitzenverbände der Krankenkassen, Verband der privaten Krankenversicherung. Deutsche Kodierrichtlinien. Allgemeine Kodierrichtlinien für die Verschlüsselung von Krankheiten und Prozeduren. Version 1.0, April 2001.

7. Australian Refined Diagnosis Related Groups, Version 4.1, Definitions Manual, Vol. 1–3. Canberra, 1998.

8. Commonwealth Department of Health and Aged Care. Report on the national hospital cost data collection. 1998–99 (Round 3). Draft for Comment. Canberra, 2000.

9. Roeder N, Irps S, Juhra C, et al. Erlöse sichern durch Kodierqualität. Messung und Interpretation von Kodierqualität. das Krankenhaus. 2002; 94:117–27. [Google Scholar]

10. Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Measure. 1960; 20:37–46. [Google Scholar]

11. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977; 33:159–74. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

12. Pringle M, Ward P, Chilvers C. Assessment of the completeness and accuracy of computer medical records in four practices committed to recording data on computer. Br J Gen Pract. 1995; 45:537–41. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

13. Logan JR, Gormann PN, Middleton B. Measuring the quality of medical records: a method for comparing completeness and correctness of clinical encounter data. In: Bakken S (ed). A Medical Odyssey: Visions of the Future and Lessons from the Past. Proc AMIA 2001 Annu Symp. 2001:408–12. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

14. Jick H, Jick SS, Derby LE. Validation of information recorded on general practitioner based computerised data resources in the United Kingdom. BMJ. 1991; 302:766–8. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

15. Hassey A, Gerrett D, Wilson A. A survey of validity and utility of electronic patient records in a general practise. BMJ. 2001; 322:1401–5. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

16. Barrie JL, Marsh DR. Quality of data in the Manchester orthopaedic database. BMJ. 1992; 304:159–62. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

17. Prins H, Kruisinga FH, Büller HA, Zwetsloot-Schonk JHM. Availability and accuracy of electronic patient data for medical practice assessment. In Hasmann A, Blobel B, Dudeck J, Engelbrecht R, Gell G, Prokosch HU (eds). Medical Infobahn for Europe. Proceedings of MIE2000 and GMDS2000. Amsterdam: IOS, 2000, pp 484–8.

18. Hogan WR, Wagner MM. Accuracy of data in computer-based patient records. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1997; 4:342–55. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

19. Nilsson G, Petersson H, Åhlfeld H, Strender L-E. Evaluation of three Swedish ICD-10 primary care versions: reliability and ease of use in diagnostic coding. Methods Inf Med. 2000; 39:325–31. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

20. Morris WC, Heinze DT, Warner HR, et al. Assessing the accuracy of an automated coding system in emergency medicine. Proc AMIA Annu Symp. 2000:595–9. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

21. Surján G. Questions on validity of International Classification of Diseases-coded diagnoses. Int J Med Inform. 1999; 54:77–95. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

22. Krummenauer F. Extensions of Cohen's kappa coefficient for multi rater trials: an overview. Informatik, Biometrie und Epidemiologie in Medizin und Biologie. 1999; 30:3–20 [in German]. [Google Scholar]

23. Hohnloser JH, Puerner F, Soltanian H. Improving coded data entry by an electronic patient record system. Methods Inf Med. 1996; 35:108–11. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

24. Iezzoni LI, Foley SM, Hughes J, Fisher ES, Heeren T. Comorbitities, complications, and coding bias. Does the number of diagnosis codes matter in predicting in-hospital mortality? JAMA. 1992; 267:2197–203. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

25. Kerby J, Keshavjee K, Holbrook AM. Comparison of diagnostic codes in a clinical-research database and an administrative database. Proc AMIA Annu Symp. 2000:1045.

26. Ingenerf J, Stellmacher F, Stausberg J, et al. Analyse der rechnergestützten Kodierqualität durch Vergleich mit der konventionellen Krankenakte: Bewertung der klinischen und ökonomischen Qualität (DRG-System). Informatik, Biometrie und Epidemiologie in Medizin und Biologie. 2002; 33:174. [Google Scholar]

27. Stausberg J, Lang H, Obertacke U, Rauhut F. Classifications in routine use: lessons from ICD-9 and ICPM in surgical practice. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2001; 8:92–100. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

28. Dexter F, Macario A. What is the relative frequency of uncommon ambulatory surgery procedures performed in the United States with an anesthesia provider? Anesth Analg. 2000; 90:1343–7. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

29. Commonwealth Department of Health and Aged Care. DRG clinical profiles for all AR-DRGs (v4.1), public and private acute hospitals combined, 1998–99. <http://www.health.gov.au/casemix/report/hospmo18.htm>. Accessed July 30, 2001.

30. Thefeld W. Prevalence of diabetes mellitus among adults in Germany. Gesundheitswesen. 1999; 61:S85–S89 [in German]. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

31. Thamm M. Blood pressure in Germany—update review of state and trends. Gesundheitswesen. 1999; 61:S90–S93 [in German]. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

32. Langrehr JM, Lohmann R, Birkner K, Neuhaus P. Evaluierung des ‘Case Mix Index’ und Fehleranalyse der Diagnosen- und Prozedurendokumentation einer chirurgischen Klinik. Ein einfaches Verfahrensmodell. Abstract CHIR-1214. 119. Kongreß der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Chirurgie, Berlin, 2002.

33. Mieth M, Wolkener F, Schmidt J, Glück E, Klar E, Kraus T. Prospective comparison of the effects of maximum and limited clinical documentation on the calculated hospital revenue in a surgical unit, based on the AR-DRG system. Chirurg. 2002; 73:492–9 [in German]. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

34. Simborg DW. DRG creep. A new hospital-acquired disease. N Engl J Med. 1981; 304:1602–4. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

35. Hsia DC, Krushat WM, Fagan AB, Tebbutt JA, Kusserow RP. Accuracy of diagnostic coding for Medicare patients under the prospective-payment system. N Engl J Med. 1988; 318:352–5. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

36. Bates DW, Evans RS, Murff H, Stetson PD, Pizziferri L, Hripcsak G. Policy and the future of adverse event detection using information technology. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2003; 10:226–8. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

37. Schwartz RM, Gagnon DE, Muri JH, Zhao QR, Kellogg R. Administrative data for quality improvement. Pediatrics. 1999; 103:291–301. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

38. Iezzoni LI. Assessing quality using administrative data. Ann Intern Med. 1997; 127:666–74. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

39. Kuperman GJ, Gardner RM, Pryor TA. HELP: A Dynamic Hospital Information System. NewYork: Springer, 1991.

40. Bates DW, Evans RS, Murff H, Stetson PD, Pizziferri L, Hripcsak G. Detecting adverse event using information technology. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2003; 10:115–28. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

41. Stausberg J, Kolke O, Albrecht K. Using a Computer-based patient record for quality management in surgery. In Cesnik B, McCray AT, Scherrer J-R (eds). MedInfo 98. Amsterdam: IOS, 1998, pp 80–4.

42. Aronsky D, Haug PJ. Assessing the quality of clinical data in a computer-based record for calculating the pneumonia severity index. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2000; 7:55–65. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

43. Brennan PF, Stead WW. Assessing data quality: from concordance, though correctness and completeness, to valid manipulatable representations. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2000; 7:106–7. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

44. Stausberg J. Design of classifications for diagnoses and procedures in a DRG system. Gesundheitsökonomie & Qualitätsmanagement. 2002; 7:297–303 [in German]. [Google Scholar]

45. Baptista J, Reis Abreu J, Correia C, Cordeiro A. Quality of computerized health data. In: Barahona P, Veloso M, Bryant J (eds). Proceedings of the Twelfth International Congress of the European Federation for Medical Informatics. Lisbon, 1994, p. 699

46. Starmer CF. Hitting a moving target: toward a compliance-driven patient record. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2002; 9:659–60. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]