Most countries face an ageing population, increasing chronic diseased, and constrictions on budget for providing health services. Involving patients in their own care by allowing them access to their patient data is a trend seen in many places. Data on the type and level of access citizens have to their own health data in three countries was gathered from public sources. Data from each individual country is presented and the experiences of Denmark, Estonia and Australia are examined whilst similarities and differences explored. The discussion adopts a citizen-centred perspective to consider how the different e-portal systems support, protect and structure citizen interactions with their own health data in three key areas: Security, privacy and data protection; User support; and Citizen adoption and use. The paper highlights the impact of opt-in/opt-out approaches on citizen access and the lack of a structured approach to addressing differences in citizen health and e-health literacy. This research also confirms while current data provides detail on the availability and use of personal health data by citizens, questions still remain over the ultimate impact on patient outcomes of these initiatives. It is anticipated the insights generated from the three countries experiences, supporting citizen access to their health data will be useful to improve these initiatives and guide other countries aspiring to support similar initiatives.

Summary: Objectives: The application of GIS in health science has increased over the last decade and new innovative application areas have emerged. This study reviews the literature and builds a framework to provide a conceptual overview of the domain, and to promote strategic planning for further research of GIS in health. Method: The framework is based on literature from the library databases Scopus and Web of Science. The articles were identified based on keywords and initially selected for further study based on titles and abstracts. A grounded theory-inspired method was applied to categorize the selected articles in main focus areas. Subsequent frequency analysis was performed on the identified articles in areas of infectious and non-infectious diseases and continent of origin. Results: A total of 865 articles were included. Four conceptual domains within GIS in health sciences comprise the framework: spatial analysis of disease, spatial analysis of health service planning, public health, health technologies and tools. Frequency analysis by disease status and location show that malaria and schistosomiasis are the most commonly analyzed infectious diseases where cancer and asthma are the most frequently analyzed non-infectious diseases. Across categories, articles from North America predominate, and in the category of spatial analysis of diseases an equal number of studies concern Asia. Conclusion: Spatial analysis of diseases and health service planning are well-established research areas. The development of future technologies and new application areas for GIS and data-gathering technologies such as GPS, smartphones, remote sensing etc. will be nudging the research in GIS and health.

Objective: To pilot benchmark measures of health information and communication technology (ICT) availability and use to facilitate cross-country learning. Materials and Methods: A prior Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development–led effort involving 30 countries selected and defined functionality-based measures for availability and use of electronic health records, health information exchange, personal health records, and telehealth. In this pilot, an Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Working Group compiled results for 38 countries for a subset of measures with broad coverage using new and/or adapted country-specific or multinational surveys and other sources from 2012 to 2015. We also synthesized country learnings to inform future benchmarking. Results: While electronic records are widely used to store and manage patient information at the point of care—all but 2 pilot countries reported use by at least half of primary care physicians; many had rates above 75%—patient information exchange across organizations/settings is less common. Large variations in the availability and use of telehealth and personal health records also exist. Discussion: Pilot participation demonstrated interest in cross-national benchmarking. Using the most comparable measures available to date, it showed substantial diversity in health ICT availability and use in all domains. The project also identified methodological considerations (e.g., structural and health systems issues that can affect measurement) important for future comparisons. Conclusion: While health policies and priorities differ, many nations aim to increase access, quality, and/or efficiency of care through effective ICT use. By identifying variations and describing key contextual factors, benchmarking offers the potential to facilitate cross-national learning and accelerate the progress of individual countries.