A 2023 report on data breaches in the healthcare system in the United States revealed that in most incidents, the leaked data was located in the network server, with almost 70 percent of data breaches indicating this location. The second-most common location of breached data was e-mail, with over 18 percent of the cases, followed by paper or films, with nearly six percent of the cases.

The Health Statistics and Health Research Database is Estonian largest set of health-related statistics and survey results administrated by National Institute for Health Development. Use of the database is free of charge.

The database consists of eight main areas divided into sub-areas. The data tables included in the sub-areas are assigned unique codes. The data tables presented in the database can be both viewed in the Internet environment, and downloaded using different file formats (.px, .xlsx, .csv, .json). You can download the detailed database user manual here (.pdf).

The database is constantly updated with new data. Dates of updating the existing data tables and adding new data are provided in the release calendar. The date of the last update to each table is provided after the title of the table in the list of data tables.

A contact person for each sub-area is provided under the "Definitions and Methodology" link of each sub-area, so you can ask additional information about the data published in the database. Contact this person for any further questions and data requests.

Read more about publication of health statistics by National Institute for Health Development in Health Statistics Dissemination Principles.

The Open Database of Healthcare Facilities (ODHF) is a collection of open data containing the names, types, and locations of health facilities across Canada. It is released under the Open Government License - Canada. The ODHF compiles open, publicly available, and directly-provided data on health facilities across Canada. Data sources include regional health authorities, provincial, territorial and municipal governments, and public health and professional healthcare bodies. This database aims to provide enhanced access to a harmonized listing of health facilities across Canada by making them available as open data. This database is a component of the Linkable Open Data Environment (LODE).

At a time of digital transformation, correlating as much relevant data as possible can provide a powerful lever in the fight against fraud. Focusing on the issue of the sources of this data, it appears that 73 percent of the players in the French healthcare ecosystem who responded to the survey in 2017 placed their partners and peers as the primary source of data collection. It was also found that open data occupied an equivalent place to data obtained from patients, clients and insured persons.

The information flow of the Hospital Discharge database (SDO flow) is the tool for collecting information relating to all hospitalization episodes provided in public and private hospitals throughout the national territory.

Born for purely administrative purposes of the hospital setting, the SDO, thanks to the wealth of information contained, not only of an administrative but also of a clinical nature, has become an indispensable tool for a wide range of analyzes and elaborations, ranging from areas to support of health planning activities for monitoring the provision of hospital assistance and the Essential Levels of Assistance, for use for proxy analyzes of other levels of assistance as well as for more strictly clinical-epidemiological and outcome analyzes. In this regard, the SDO database is a fundamental element of the National Outcomes Program (PNE).

The information collected includes the patient's personal characteristics (including age, sex, residence, level of education), characteristics of the hospitalization (for example institution and discharge discipline, hospitalization regime, method of discharge, booking date, priority class of hospitalization) and clinical features (e.g. main diagnosis, concomitant diagnoses, diagnostic or therapeutic procedures)

Information relating to drugs administered during hospitalization or adverse reactions to them (subject to other specific information flows) is excluded from the discharge form.

Organizations can license synthetic, structured data generated by Syntegra from electronic health record systems of community hospitals across the United States, reaching beyond just claims and Rx data.

The synthetic data provides a detailed picture of the patient's journey throughout their hospital stay, including patient demographic information and payer type, as well as rich data not found in any other sources. Examples of this data include: drugs given (timing and dosing), patient location (e.g., ICU, floor, ER), lab results (timing by day and hour), physician roles (e.g., surgeon, attending), medications given, and vital signs. The participating community hospitals with bed sizes ranging from 25 to 532 provide unique visibility and assessment of variation in care outside of large academic medical centers and healthcare networks.

Our synthetic data engine is trained on a broadly representative dataset made up of deep clinical information of approximately 6 million unique patient records and 18 million encounters over 5 years of history. Notably, synthetic data generation allows for the creation of any number of records needed to power your project.

EHR data is available in the following formats: — Cleaned, analytics-ready (a layer of clean and normalized concepts in Tuva Health’s standard relational data model format — FHIR USCDI (labs, medications, vitals, encounters, patients, etc.)

The synthetic data maintains full statistical accuracy, yet does not contain any actual patients, thus removing any patient privacy liability risk. Privacy is preserved in a way that goes beyond HIPAA or GDPR compliance. Our industry-leading metrics prove that both privacy and fidelity are fully maintained.

— Generate the data needed for product development, testing, demo, or other needs — Access data at a scalable price point — Build your desired population, both in size and demographics — Scale up and down to fit specific needs, increasing efficiency and affordability

Syntegra's synthetic data engine also has the ability to augment the original data: — Expand population sizes, rare cohorts, or outcomes of interest — Address algorithmic fairness by correcting bias or introducing intentional bias — Conditionally generate data to inform scenario planning — Impute missing value to minimize gaps in the data

Diagnosis data of patients and patients in hospitals.

The hospital diagnosis statistics are part of the hospital statistics and have been collected annually from all hospitals since 1993. The statistics include information on the main diagnosis (coded according to ICD-10), length of stay, department and selected sociodemographic characteristics such as age, gender and place of residence, among others.

Basic data of hospitals and preventive care or rehabilitation facilities.

The basic data statistics are part of the hospital statistics. The material and personnel resources of hospitals and preventive or rehabilitation facilities and their specialist departments have been reported annually since 1990.

The aggregated data are freely accessible.

In 2019, 83 percent of the physicians and 79 percent of students and residents surveyed in the U.S. said that patient data would be valuable to them clinically if it was sourced from a wearable device. Furthermore, 80 percent of physicians and 78 percent of students and residents said they would give clinical importance to patients self reported data if it was from a health app.

Definitions and data sources for quality domains and subdomains.

Evaluation dimensions, measures, and data sources of the RE-AIM framework.

The National Health Data System (SNDS) will make it possible to link:

• health insurance data (SNIIRAM database);
• hospital data (PMSI database);
• the medical causes of death (base of the CépiDC of Inserm);
• disability-related data (from MDPH - CNSA data);
• a sample of data from complementary health insurance organisations.

The first two categories of data are already available and constitute the first version of the SNDS. The medical causes of death should feed the SNDS from the second half of 2017. The first data from the CNSA will arrive from 2018 and the sample of complementary organizations in 2019.

The purpose of the SNDS is to make these data available in order to promote studies, research or evaluations of a nature in the public interest and contributing to one of the following purposes:

• health information;
• the implementation of health policies;
• knowledge of health expenditure;
• informing professionals and establishments about their activities;
• innovation in the fields of health and medico-social care;
• monitoring, surveillance and health security.

This is the current Medical Service Study Area. California Medical Service Study Areas are created by the California Department of Health Care Access and Information (HCAI).Check the Data Dictionary for field descriptions.Search for the Medical Service Study Area data on the CHHS Open Data Portal.Checkout the California Healthcare Atlas for more Medical Service Study Area information.This is an update to the MSSA geometries and demographics to reflect the new 2020 Census tract data. The Medical Service Study Area (MSSA) polygon layer represents the best fit mapping of all new 2020 California census tract boundaries to the original 2010 census tract boundaries used in the construction of the original 2010 MSSA file. Each of the state's new 9,129 census tracts was assigned to one of the previously established medical service study areas (excluding tracts with no land area), as identified in this data layer. The MSSA Census tract data is aggregated by HCAI, to create this MSSA data layer. This represents the final re-mapping of 2020 Census tracts to the original 2010 MSSA geometries. The 2010 MSSA were based on U.S. Census 2010 data and public meetings held throughout California.Source of update: American Community Survey 5-year 2006-2010 data for poverty. For source tables refer to InfoUSA update procedural documentation. The 2010 MSSA Detail layer was developed to update fields affected by population change. The American Community Survey 5-year 2006-2010 population data pertaining to total, in households, race, ethnicity, age, and poverty was used in the update. The 2010 MSSA Census Tract Detail map layer was developed to support geographic information systems (GIS) applications, representing 2010 census tract geography that is the foundation of 2010 medical service study area (MSSA) boundaries. ***This version is the finalized MSSA reconfiguration boundaries based on the US Census Bureau 2010 Census. In 1976 Garamendi Rural Health Services Act, required the development of a geographic framework for determining which parts of the state were rural and which were urban, and for determining which parts of counties and cities had adequate health care resources and which were "medically underserved". Thus, sub-city and sub-county geographic units called "medical service study areas [MSSAs]" were developed, using combinations of census-defined geographic units, established following General Rules promulgated by a statutory commission. After each subsequent census the MSSAs were revised. In the scheduled revisions that followed the 1990 census, community meetings of stakeholders (including county officials, and representatives of hospitals and community health centers) were held in larger metropolitan areas. The meetings were designed to develop consensus as how to draw the sub-city units so as to best display health care disparities. The importance of involving stakeholders was heightened in 1992 when the United States Department of Health and Human Services' Health and Resources Administration entered a formal agreement to recognize the state-determined MSSAs as "rational service areas" for federal recognition of "health professional shortage areas" and "medically underserved areas". After the 2000 census, two innovations transformed the process, and set the stage for GIS to emerge as a major factor in health care resource planning in California. First, the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development [OSHPD], which organizes the community stakeholder meetings and provides the staff to administer the MSSAs, entered into an Enterprise GIS contract. Second, OSHPD authorized at least one community meeting to be held in each of the 58 counties, a significant number of which were wholly rural or frontier counties. For populous Los Angeles County, 11 community meetings were held. As a result, health resource data in California are collected and organized by 541 geographic units. The boundaries of these units were established by community healthcare experts, with the objective of maximizing their usefulness for needs assessment purposes. The most dramatic consequence was introducing a data simultaneously displayed in a GIS format. A two-person team, incorporating healthcare policy and GIS expertise, conducted the series of meetings, and supervised the development of the 2000-census configuration of the MSSAs.MSSA Configuration Guidelines (General Rules):- Each MSSA is composed of one or more complete census tracts.- As a general rule, MSSAs are deemed to be "rational service areas [RSAs]" for purposes of designating health professional shortage areas [HPSAs], medically underserved areas [MUAs] or medically underserved populations [MUPs].- MSSAs will not cross county lines.- To the extent practicable, all census-defined places within the MSSA are within 30 minutes travel time to the largest population center within the MSSA, except in those circumstances where meeting this criterion would require splitting a census tract.- To the extent practicable, areas that, standing alone, would meet both the definition of an MSSA and a Rural MSSA, should not be a part of an Urban MSSA.- Any Urban MSSA whose population exceeds 200,000 shall be divided into two or more Urban MSSA Subdivisions.- Urban MSSA Subdivisions should be within a population range of 75,000 to 125,000, but may not be smaller than five square miles in area. If removing any census tract on the perimeter of the Urban MSSA Subdivision would cause the area to fall below five square miles in area, then the population of the Urban MSSA may exceed 125,000. - To the extent practicable, Urban MSSA Subdivisions should reflect recognized community and neighborhood boundaries and take into account such demographic information as income level and ethnicity. Rural Definitions: A rural MSSA is an MSSA adopted by the Commission, which has a population density of less than 250 persons per square mile, and which has no census defined place within the area with a population in excess of 50,000. Only the population that is located within the MSSA is counted in determining the population of the census defined place. A frontier MSSA is a rural MSSA adopted by the Commission which has a population density of less than 11 persons per square mile. Any MSSA which is not a rural or frontier MSSA is an urban MSSA. Last updated December 6th 2024.

This health data inventory is the result of work conducted for the Vermont Health Care Innovation Project. While the goal of a Vermont Health Data Inventory is a unified data source for health care data, this project is just the first step in moving toward that goal. A unified data source would provide a gateway or portal to the diverse health data in Vermont. This includes many kinds of health related data: the all-payer claims dataset;health expenditures; clinical datasets; survey data; vital records; and epidemiologic data. It is the intent that this initial inventory project will inform this goal.

From the responding healthcare organizations, 93 percent reported using ambulatory care EHR and billing systems to collect data for their disease registry. Disease registries are a helpful tool to segment patients into actionable groups based on pre-defined parameters. This statistic shows the percentage of U.S. healthcare organizations who reported having connected select data sources to their disease registry as of 2019.

Due to the heterogeneity of existing European sources of observational healthcare data, data source-tailored choices are needed to execute multi-data source, multi-national epidemiological studies. This makes transparent documentation paramount. In this proof-of-concept study, a novel standard data derivation procedure was tested in a set of heterogeneous data sources. Identification of subjects with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) was the test case. We included three primary care data sources (PCDs), three record linkage of administrative and/or registry data sources (RLDs), one hospital and one biobank. Overall, data from 12 million subjects from six European countries were extracted. Based on a shared event definition, sixteeen standard algorithms (components) useful to identify T2DM cases were generated through a top-down/bottom-up iterative approach. Each component was based on one single data domain among diagnoses, drugs, diagnostic test utilization and laboratory results. Diagnoses-based components were subclassified considering the healthcare setting (primary, secondary, inpatient care). The Unified Medical Language System was used for semantic harmonization within data domains. Individual components were extracted and proportion of population identified was compared across data sources. Drug-based components performed similarly in RLDs and PCDs, unlike diagnoses-based components. Using components as building blocks, logical combinations with AND, OR, AND NOT were tested and local experts recommended their preferred data source-tailored combination. The population identified per data sources by resulting algorithms varied from 3.5% to 15.7%, however, age-specific results were fairly comparable. The impact of individual components was assessed: diagnoses-based components identified the majority of cases in PCDs (93–100%), while drug-based components were the main contributors in RLDs (81–100%). The proposed data derivation procedure allowed the generation of data source-tailored case-finding algorithms in a standardized fashion, facilitated transparent documentation of the process and benchmarking of data sources, and provided bases for interpretation of possible inter-data source inconsistency of findings in future studies.

This statistic displays the results from a survey asking individuals in France for the sources of their healthcare information in 2018. According to data provided by Ipsos, 56 percent of French people receive information about healthcare from doctors or other healthcare professionals, while 43 percent of respondents use a pharmacist when they need healthcare information.

Background: In Brazil, studies that map electronic healthcare databases in order to assess their suitability for use in pharmacoepidemiologic research are lacking. We aimed to identify, catalogue, and characterize Brazilian data sources for Drug Utilization Research (DUR).Methods: The present study is part of the project entitled, “Publicly Available Data Sources for Drug Utilization Research in Latin American (LatAm) Countries.” A network of Brazilian health experts was assembled to map secondary administrative data from healthcare organizations that might provide information related to medication use. A multi-phase approach including internet search of institutional government websites, traditional bibliographic databases, and experts’ input was used for mapping the data sources. The reviewers searched, screened and selected the data sources independently; disagreements were resolved by consensus. Data sources were grouped into the following categories: 1) automated databases; 2) Electronic Medical Records (EMR); 3) national surveys or datasets; 4) adverse event reporting systems; and 5) others. Each data source was characterized by accessibility, geographic granularity, setting, type of data (aggregate or individual-level), and years of coverage. We also searched for publications related to each data source.Results: A total of 62 data sources were identified and screened; 38 met the eligibility criteria for inclusion and were fully characterized. We grouped 23 (60%) as automated databases, four (11%) as adverse event reporting systems, four (11%) as EMRs, three (8%) as national surveys or datasets, and four (11%) as other types. Eighteen (47%) were classified as publicly and conveniently accessible online; providing information at national level. Most of them offered more than 5 years of comprehensive data coverage, and presented data at both the individual and aggregated levels. No information about population coverage was found. Drug coding is not uniform; each data source has its own coding system, depending on the purpose of the data. At least one scientific publication was found for each publicly available data source.Conclusions: There are several types of data sources for DUR in Brazil, but a uniform system for drug classification and data quality evaluation does not exist. The extent of population covered by year is unknown. Our comprehensive and structured inventory reveals a need for full characterization of these data sources.

Stop relying on outdated and inaccurate databases and lists and let Wiza be your source of truth for all plastics outreach.

Why we're different: Healthcare Professionals are not easy to get in contact with - Wiza is not a static database that gets refreshed on occasion. Every datapoint is sourced and verified the moment that you receive the information. We verify deliverability of every single email ahead of providing the data, and we ensure that each person in your dataset has 100% data accuracy by leveraging Linkedin Data sourced through their live Linkedin profile.

Key Features:

Comprehensive Data Coverage: Stop contacting the same healthcare professionals as everyone else. Wiza's search fund Data is sourced live, not stored in a limited database. We source the contact data in real-time based on everyone who is currently a plastic surgeon on Linkedin at the time of request.

High-Quality, Accurate Data: Wiza ensures accuracy of all datapoints by taking a few key steps that other data providers fail to take: (1) Every email is SMTP verified ahead of delivery, ensuring they will not bounce (2) Every person's Linkedin profile is checked live to ensure we have 100% job title, company, location, etc. accuracy, ahead of providing any data (3) Phone numbers are constantly being verified with AI to ensure accuracy

Linkedin Data: Wiza is able to provide Linkedin Data points, sourced live from each person's Linkedin profile, including Subtitle, Bio, Job Title, Job Description, Skills, Languages, Certifications, Work History, Education, Open to Work, Premium Status, and more!

Personal Data: Wiza has access to industry leading volumes of B2C Contact Data, meaning you can find gmail/yahoo/hotmail email addresses, and mobile phone number data to contact your plastic surgeons.

28 November 2019. Following user and stakeholder consultation, we made several revisions to our data processing and methodology and revised all figures from September 2015 to December 2018 in the General Practice Workforce December 2018 publication. Following later changes to the September 2015 to December 2016 full-time equivalent (FTE) GP locum figures, we revised all affected locum figures in the General Practice Workforce September 2019 publication. The figures in this publication are no longer valid as they were calculated using the previous methodology and therefore have now been superseded. More information and the revised figures can be found on the General Practice Workforce September 2019 publication page at https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/general-and-personal-medical-services/final-30-september-2019. This report presents data about GPs, Nurses, Direct Patient Care and Admin/Non-Clinical staff working in General Practice in England, along with information on their patients, practice and the services they provide. This is a quarterly publication and includes final data from September 2015 to September 2018. Final December 2018 data will be available in February 2019. CHANGE NOTICE: From the June 2018 collection, the source for GP Registrars (foundation and specialty registrar trainees on placements in General Practice) changed. The new data source is the Health Education England (HEE) Trainee Information System (TIS). This has improved the quality of our Registrar data and removes the need for a provisional data release. This publication contains June 2018 and September 2018 data based on the change in data source, with information prior to June 2018 using the previous source of ESR data. CONSULTATION: Further information on the new data source for GP registrars and other proposed improvements to the General Practice Workforce publication are discussed in our "Methodological Change Notice" available under Resources. We are continually looking to improve the quality of the data in this series to make them more useful for our users and we welcome any feedback on these proposed changes to gp-data@nhs.net, by the 20th January 2018. Various data breakdowns are available in the accompanying Excel and CSV files, including time series and breakdowns by categories such as age and gender. Data is also presented regionally and at practice level in the accompanying CSVs. This publication also features an online interactive dashboard which allows users to explore the underlying data in a variety of ways. This can be accessed by clicking on the dashboard icon below. Links to other publications presenting healthcare workforce information can be found under Related Links.

The global market for IT spending on clinical analytics is experiencing robust growth, driven by the increasing adoption of electronic health records (EHRs), the rising prevalence of chronic diseases, and the growing need for data-driven decision-making in healthcare. The market's expansion is fueled by the ability of clinical analytics to improve patient outcomes, reduce healthcare costs, and enhance operational efficiency. Advancements in big data analytics, artificial intelligence (AI), and machine learning (ML) are further accelerating market growth. While precise figures weren't provided, let's assume, based on industry reports and the stated study period of 2019-2033, a conservative market size of $25 billion in 2025 and a Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 12%. This suggests a significant expansion to approximately $60 billion by 2033. The market segmentation reveals strong demand across both stand-alone and integrated solutions, with payer and provider applications equally vital. Major players like Allscripts, Cerner, and Optum are driving innovation, developing sophisticated platforms that integrate diverse data sources and provide actionable insights. However, challenges remain. High implementation costs, data security concerns, and the need for skilled professionals to interpret complex analytics can hinder broader adoption. Furthermore, interoperability issues between different healthcare systems continue to pose a significant obstacle. Despite these hurdles, the long-term outlook for IT spending on clinical analytics remains positive, driven by increasing government initiatives promoting digital health and the inherent value proposition of data-driven healthcare improvements.