Cited by 897Electronic Health Records SystemsInformation Systems Theories and ImplementationTechnology and Human Factors in Education and Health

A new sociotechnical model for studying health information technology in complex adaptive healthcare systems

Open access
Sittig, D. F., Singh, H.·2010·Quality and Safety in Health Care

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Conceptual models have been developed to address challenges inherent in studying health information technology (HIT). METHOD: This manuscript introduces an eight-dimensional model specifically designed to address the sociotechnical challenges involved in design, development, implementation, use and evaluation of HIT within complex adaptive healthcare systems. DISCUSSION: The eight dimensions are not independent, sequential or hierarchical, but rather are interdependent and inter-related concepts similar to compositions of other complex adaptive systems. Hardware and software computing infrastructure refers to equipment and software used to power, support and operate clinical applications and devices. Clinical content refers to textual or numeric data and images that constitute the 'language' of clinical applications. The human--computer interface includes all aspects of the computer that users can see, touch or hear as they interact with it. People refers to everyone who interacts in some way with the system, from developer to end user, including potential patient-users. Workflow and communication are the processes or steps involved in ensuring that patient care tasks are carried out effectively. Two additional dimensions of the model are internal organisational features (eg, policies, procedures and culture) and external rules and regulations, both of which may facilitate or constrain many aspects of the preceding dimensions. The final dimension is measurement and monitoring, which refers to the process of measuring and evaluating both intended and unintended consequences of HIT implementation and use. We illustrate how our model has been successfully applied in real-world complex adaptive settings to understand and improve HIT applications at various stages of development and implementation.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/qshc.2010.042085

Cites

64 of 64 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Digitisation redistributes responsibility across human and technical actors.

    “Digitisation redistributes responsibility across human and technical actors.”

    From Why digital health fails silently: a sociotechnical theory of health information technology–related risk (2026) · cites this paper as [13]

    In “Moving towards a New Socio-technical Model for HIT” (page unavailable), the paper says care is shifting toward patients’ homes, software can enforce organizational policies, and some apparent user problems arise from system design. These passages support a change in how work and problems are distributed with HIT, but the paper does not explicitly assign responsibility to technical actors. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Digital systems reduce visibility of system state and process integrity, making HIT hazards latent and detected indirectly through downstream consequences.

    “Digital systems frequently mediate clinical work in ways that reduce direct visibility of system state and process integrity.”

    From Why digital health fails silently: a sociotechnical theory of health information technology–related risk (2026) · cites this paper as [13]

    In “Moving towards a New Socio-technical Model for HIT” (page unavailable), the paper says users are generally unaware of much of the computing infrastructure until it fails, supporting reduced visibility of one aspect of system state. It does not establish the broader claim that digital mediation reduces direct visibility of clinical process integrity, or that HIT hazards are detected only indirectly through downstream consequences. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Diffusion of responsibility complicates accountability and can create gaps in oversight, particularly when responsibilities for monitoring, escalation, and remediation are not clearly defined.

    “This diffusion complicates accountability and can create gaps in oversight, particularly when responsibilities for monitoring, escalation, and remediation are not clearly defined (13).”

    From Why digital health fails silently: a sociotechnical theory of health information technology–related risk (2026) · cites this paper as [13]

    The HIT Use section reports missed follow-up of abnormal test results and identifies organizational policies about who was responsible as relevant. The Background section calls for defined decision-making, monitoring, and governance processes. The paper does not specifically say that diffusion of responsibility creates oversight gaps, or discuss unclear escalation and remediation responsibilities. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Decisions about information accuracy, timing, and relevance are increasingly mediated by algorithms, system configurations, and interoperability rules that are often opaque to end users.

    “Decisions about information accuracy, timing, and relevance are increasingly mediated by algorithms, system configurations, and interoperability rules that are often opaque to end users (1, 13).”

    From Why digital health fails silently: a sociotechnical theory of health information technology–related risk (2026) · cites this paper as [13]

    In “HIT Evaluation” (page unavailable), the paper reports that a software configuration error prevented some test-result notifications from reaching clinicians; “Moving towards a New Socio-technical Model for HIT” says users are generally unaware of underlying infrastructure until it fails. These passages support the role of system configuration and some lack of visibility, but do not establish the broader claim about increasingly algorithm-mediated judgments of accuracy and relevance or opaque interoperability rules. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The interest in trialing ambient AI scribes in the ICU was tempered by concerns about the sociotechnical implications of voice-based AI in team-based, high-risk environments.

    “The interest in trialing ambient AI scribes in the ICU was tempered by concerns about the sociotechnical implications of voice-based AI in team-based, high-risk environments, highlighting the need for careful, context-sensitive implementation [27].”

    From Clinician Perspectives on Ambient AI Scribes in the Intensive Care Unit: Qualitative Interview Study (2026) · cites this paper as [27]

    The Introduction describes a sociotechnical framework for studying safe implementation of health IT in complex clinical settings, and “Relationships and Interactions between our Model’s Components” explains why a system that works in one unit may fail in another. This supports the need for context-sensitive implementation, but the paper does not report interest in trialing ambient AI scribes in the ICU or concerns specifically about voice-based AI. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [36]Sittig DF Wright A Simonaitis L Carpenter JD Allen GO Doebbeling BN Sirajuddin AM Ash JS Middleton B The state of the art in clinical knowledge management: an inventory of tools and techniques Int J Med Inform 2010 Jan 79 1 44 57 19828364 PMC2895508

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sittig, D. F., & Singh, H.
Affiliations
  • Memorial Hermann (US)
  • Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Sittig, D. F.
Venue
Quality and Safety in Health Care
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2010-10-01
Volume
19
Issue
Suppl 3
Pages
i68-i74
ISSN
  • 1475-3898 (ISSN-L)
  • 1475-3901
OpenAlex
W2110034024
Cited by
897
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 179 · 2025: 91 · 2024: 43 · 2023: 75 · 2022: 58 · 2021: 66 · 2020: 52 · 2019: 70 · 2018: 40 · 2017: 48 · 2016: 41 · 2015: 36 · 2014: 36 · 2013: 34 · 2012: 15
FWCI
36.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMJ Quality & Safety (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Health Services Research and Development
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (R18HS017820)
  • VA National Center for Patient Safety
  • National Cancer Institute (K23CA125585)
  • U.S. National Library of Medicine (R01LM006942, R56LM006942)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Technology and Human Factors in Education and Health
Keywords
health information technology, socio-technical model, complex adaptive systems, health care system, clinical workflow, human-machine interaction, organizational culture, health policy and regulation, monitoring and measurement, unintended consequences
MeSH terms
Diffusion of Innovation, Health Services Research, Humans, Ergonomics, Medical Informatics, Models, Theoretical, Planning Techniques, Programming Languages, Software Design, User-Computer Interface, Organizational Culture, Organizational Policy, Workflow

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review