Conference article

Collaborative Process Modelling and Evaluation in E-health

Niels Frederik Garmann-Johnsen
Department of Information Systems, University of Agder, Norway

Øyvind Hellang
Department of Information Systems, University of Agder, Norway

Download article

Published in: Scandinavian Conference on Health Informatics; August 22; 2014; Grimstad; Norway

Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings 102:4, p. 23-30

Show more +

Published: 2014-08-20

ISBN: 978-91-7519-241-3

ISSN: 1650-3686 (print), 1650-3740 (online)


There is a gap in Design Science Research literature regarding context and methodologies for Evaluation. The Evaluation stage is the bridge between Design (or procurement); and Benefit management. Taking a constructive approach to the many challenges this poses; we propose a framework for e-health design science research evaluation. We also perform a systematic literature review for the use of process modelling notation in e-health; as a prerequisite for process and service co-creation and evaluation; and assess these; as they are applied in the literature; for cognitive efficiency in communication between receiver and sender.


Design Science Research; Process modelling; Graphic notation; Business-IT alignment; E-health; Evaluation


[1] Holen-Rabbersvik E; Eikebrokk TR; Fensli RW; Thygesen E; and Slettebø Å. Important challenges for coordination and inter-municipal cooperation in health care services: a Delphi study. BMC health services research. 2013: 13 (451): 1-12.

[2] Garmann-Johnsen NF and Eikebrokk TR. Critical Success Factors for Inter-Organizational Process Collaboration in eHealth. eTELEMED 2014: Barcelona 2014.

[3] Mantzana V; Themistocleous M; Irani Z; and Morabito V. Identifying healthcare actors involved in the adoption of information systems. European Journal of Information Systems. 2007: 16(1): 91-102.

[4] Dolan B. 10 reasons why Google Health failed. MobiHealthNews 2011. Available from (July 2014): health-failed.

[5] Jones M; Samalionis F. From small ideas to radical service innovation. Design Management Review. 2008: 19(1): 20-6.

[6] Livingood Jr WC; Woodhouse LD; Godin SW. The feasibility and desirability of public health credentialing: a survey of public health leaders. American journal of
public health. 1995: 85(6): 765-70.

[7] Meinel C and Leifer L. Design thinking research. Design thinking: understand–improve–apply Springer; Heidelberg. 2010.

[8] Oates BJ. Researching information systems and computing. London: Sage Publications Ltd; 2006.

[9] Munkvold BE. Debate Forum Editorial. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems. 2007: 19(2): 11.

[10] Iivari J. A Paradigmatic Analysis of Information Systems As a Design Science. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems. 2007: 19(2): 5.

[11] Hevner AR. A Three Cycle View of Design Science Research. Scandinavian journal of information systems. 2007: 19(2): 4.

[12] Iivari J. Nothing is as Clear as Unclear. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems. 2007: 19(2): 111-117.

[13] Hevner A and Chatterjee S. Design research in information systems: theory and practice: New York: Springer; 2010.

[14] Rossi M and Sein MK. Design research workshop: a proactive research approach. Presentation delivered at IRIS. 2003: 26: 9-12.

[15] Sein M; Henfridsson O; Purao S; Rossi M; and Lindgren R. Action design research. MIS Quarterly 2011: 35(1): 37-56.

[16] Peffers K; Tuunanen T; Rothenberger MA; and Chatterjee S. A design science research methodology for information systems research. Journal of management information systems. 2007: 24(3): 45-77.

[17] Sonnenberg C; vom Brocke J. Evaluations in the science of the artificial–reconsidering the build-evaluate pattern in design science research. DESRIST 2012: LNCS 7286: 381-397.

[18] Moody DL. The physics of notations: a scientific approach to designing visual notations in software engineering. ACM/IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering. 2010: 2. 485-486.

[19] Moody DL. The “physics” of notations: toward a scientific basis for constructing visual notations in software engineering. Software Engineering; IEEE Transactions on. 2009: 35(6): 756-779.

[20] Gill L; White L; and Cameron ID. Service co-creation in community-based aged healthcare. Managing Service Quality. 2011: 21(2): 152-77.

[21] Abraham R. Enterprise Architecture Artifacts as Boundary Objects–A Framework of Properties. European Conference on Information Systems 2013: 120.

[22] Alexander IM. Characteristics of and problems with primary care interactions experienced by an ethnically diverse group of woman. Journal of the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners 2004: 16(7): 300-310.

[23] Alexander IM. Emancipatory Actions Displayed by Multi-Ethnic Women: “Regaining Control of My Health Care”. Journal of the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners 2010: 22(11): 602-611.

[24] Behnam SA and Amyot D. Evolution mechanisms for goal–driven pattern families used in business process modelling. International Journal of Electronic Business
2013: 10(3): 254-291.

[25] Fernando K and Siriwardena A. Standards of documentation of the surgeon—patient consultation in current surgical practice. British journal of surgery 2001:
88(2): 309-312.

[26] Gerber MR; Leiter KS; Hermann RC; and Bor DH. How and why community hospital clinicians document a positive screen for intimate partner violence: a crosssectional study. BMC family practice 2005: 6: 48.

[27] Hasselbring W. Technical opinion: On defining computer science terminology. Communications of the ACM 1999: 42(2): 88-91.

[28] Huser V; Rasmussen LV; Oberg R; and Starren JB. Implementation of workflow engine technology to deliver basic clinical decision support functionality. BMC medical research methodology. 2011: 11: 43.

[29] Iacob M-E; Rothengatter D; and Van Hillegersberg J. A Health-care Application of Goal-driven Software Design. Applied Medical Informatics 2009: 24.

[30] Kumarapeli P; de Lusignan S; Koczan P; Jones B; and Sheeler I. The feasibility of using UML to compare the impact of different brands of computer system on the clinical consultation. Informatics in primary care 2008: 15(4): 245-253.

[31] Middleton L and Uys L. A social constructionist analysis of talk in episodes of psychiatric student nurses conversations with clients in community clinics. Journal of advanced nursing 2009: 65(3): 576-586.

[32] Mittal S; Risco-Martín JL; and Zeigler BP. DEVS/SOA: A cross-platform framework for net-centric modeling and simulation in DEVS unified process simulation 2009: 85(7): 419-450.

[33] Panayotopoulos A and Assimakopoulos N. Problem structuring in a hospital. European journal of operational research 1987: 29(2): 135-143.

[34] Park H; Cho I; and Byeun N. Modeling a terminologybased electronic nursing record system: An objectoriented approach. International journal of medical informatics 2007: 76(10): 735-746.

[35] Pourshahid A; Amyot D; Peyton L; Ghanavati S; Chen P; Weiss M; and Forster AJ. Business process management with the user requirements notation. Electronic Commerce Research 2009: 9(4): 269-316.

[36] Pourshahid A; Mussbacher G; Amyot D; and Weiss M. An aspect-oriented framework for Business Process Improvement. MCETECH 2009: LNBIP 26: 290-305.

[37] Rodríguez A; Fernández-Medina E; Trujillo J; and Piattini M. Secure business process model specification through a UML 2.0 activity diagram profile. Decision Support Systems 2011: 51(3): 446-465.

[38] Rojo MG; Rolón E; Calahorra L; García F; Sánchez RP; Ruiz F; Ballester N; Armenteros M; Rodriguez T; and Espartero RM. Implementation of the Business Process Modelling Notation (BPMN) in the modelling of anatomic pathology processes. European Congress on Telepathology and International Congress on Virtual Microscopy. Diagnostic Pathology 2008: 3(1 Suppl): S22.

[39] Stojadinovic T; Radonjic V; and Radenkovic B. EBusiness in the Regulation of Medicines in Serbia. Drug Information Journal 2010: 44(2): 177-187.

[40] Ström M; Koivisto R; and Andersson D. UML modelling concepts of HAZOP to enhance the ability to identifyemerging risks. Journal of Risk Research 2013: 16(3-4): 421-432.

[41] Suthers DD and Hundhausen CD. An experimental study of the effects of representational guidance on collaborative learning processes. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 2003: 12(2): 183-218.

[42] Sutton DR; Taylor P; and Earle K. Evaluation of PROforma as a language for implementing medical guidelines in a practical context. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 2006: 6: 20.

[43] Ten Teije A; Marcos M; Balser M; van Croonenborg J; Duelli C; van Harmelen F; Lucas P; Miksch S; Reif W; Rosenbrand K; and Seyfang A. Improving medical protocols by formal methods. Artificial intelligence in medicine 2006: 36(3): 193-209.

[44] August-Brady M. Flexibility: a concept analysis. Nursing forum 2000: 35(1): 5-13.

[45] Bonacina S; Marceglia S; Bertoldi M; and Pinciroli F. Modelling; designing; and implementing a family-based health record prototype. Computers in biology and medicine 2010: 40(6): 580-590.

[46] Bricher G. Disabled people; Health Professionals and the social model of disability: can there be a research relationship? Disability & Society 2000: 15(5): 781-793.

[47] Burstein F and Linger H. Supporting post-Fordist work practices: A knowledge management framework for supporting knowledge work. Information Technology& People 2003: 16(3): 289-305.

[48] de Carvalho ECA; Batilana AP; Simkins J; Martins H; Shah J; Rajgor D; Shah A; Rockart S; and Peitrobon R. Application description and policy model in collaborative environment for sharing of information on epidemiological and clinical research data sets. PloS one 2010: 5(2): e9314.

[49] Crocker T; Johnson O; and King S. The suitability of care pathways for integrating processes and information systems in healthcare. Transforming Government: People; Process and Policy 2009: 3(3): 289-301.

[50] Diomidous M and Zikos D. Object Oriented Modeling of the Health and Safety Process in the Case of the Agricultural Work. Acta Informatica Medica 2009: 17(4): 205-208.

[51] Edwards P; Collinson M; and Rees C. The determinants of employee responses to total quality management: six case studies. Organization studies. 1998: 19(3): 449-475.

[52] Frohlich KL and Potvin L. Collective lifestyles as the target for health promotion. Canadian journal of public health Revue canadienne de sante publique 1999: 90: S11-4.

[53] Jablonski S; Lay R; Melier C; Faerber M; Volz B; Dornstauder S; Gotz M; and Muller S. Integrated Process and Data Management for Healthcare Applications. International Journal of Healthcare Information Systems and Informatics (IJHISI) 2007: 2(4): 1-21.

[54] Liddell WG and Powell JH. Agreeing access policy in a general medical practice: a case study using QPID. System Dynamics Review 2004: 20(1): 49-73.

[55] Murie J and Douglas-Scott G. Developing an evidence base for patient and public involvement. Clinical Governance: An International Journal 2004: 9(3): 147-

[56] Papavassiliou G and Mentzas G. Knowledge modelling in weakly-structured business processes. Journal of Knowledge Management 2003: 7(2): 18-33.

[57] Peirson LJ; Boydell KM; Ferguson HB; and Ferris LE. An ecological process model of systems change. American journal of community psychology 2011: 47(3- 4): 307-321.

[58] Santos IC; Gazelle GS; Rocha LA; and Tavares JMR. Modeling of the medical device development process. Expert Review of Medical Devices 2012: 9(5): 537-543.

[59] Valenta AL and Wigger U. Q-methodology: definition and application in health care informatics. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 1997: 4(6): 501-510.

[60] Akhtar-Danesh N; Baumann A; and Cordingley L. QMethodology in Nursing Research A Promising Method for the Study of Subjectivity. Western Journal of Nursing Research 2008: 30(6): 759-773.

[61] Boess S and Simonse L. eHealth experiences and care models: buliding a paramter framework for design and implementation Presentation at the Med-e-Tel conference [cited 2014 May]. Available from (July 2014):

Citations in Crossref