The work of reuse: birth certificate data and healthcare accountability measurements

Data reuse – long a key focus of information studies and CSCW research on eScience – is increasingly a major issue in organizations attempting to leverage data gathered using information systems for accountability functions such as performance measurements. Carrying out organizational analytics and performance measurements for accountability typically rests on the ability to successfully reuse existing, procurable data. We present results from an ethnographic study of the practices of recording birth certificate data and related attempts to assess and improve birth certificate data in response to a new reuse of birth certificate data for measurements introduced to hold hospitals accountable for the quality of the care they are delivering. Drawing on literature on data reuse and information infrastructure, we describe the situated work that must take place in order for birth certificate data to be reused for accountability purposes, and the organizational capacity building that must take place to facilitate the reuse of birth certificate data for measurement oriented to organizational improvement and accountability.

[1]  References , 1971 .

[2]  J. Lofland,et al.  Analyzing Social Settings , 1971 .

[3]  Organizations , 1992, Restoration & Management Notes.

[4]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Learning from Notes: organizational issues in groupware implementation , 1992, CSCW '92.

[5]  Philip E. Agre,et al.  Surveillance and Capture: Two Models of Privacy , 1994, Inf. Soc..

[6]  Abigail Sellen,et al.  Collaborative tools and the practicalities of professional work at the international monetary fund , 1995, CHI '95.

[7]  G. Bowker,et al.  The multiple bodies of the medical record : Toward a sociology of an artifact , 1996 .

[8]  Christian Heath,et al.  Documents and professional practice: “bad” organisational reasons for “good” clinical records , 1996, CSCW '96.

[9]  Christine Halverson,et al.  Considering an organization's memory , 1998, CSCW '98.

[10]  M. Power The audit society : rituals of verification , 1999 .

[11]  Susan Leigh Star,et al.  Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences , 1999 .

[12]  Brian T. Pentland,et al.  Will auditors take over the world? Program, technique and the verification of everything , 2000 .

[13]  Andy Neely,et al.  The Performance Prism: The Scorecard for Measuring and Managing Business Success , 2002 .

[14]  Jeremy P. Birnholtz,et al.  Data at work: supporting sharing in science and engineering , 2003, GROUP.

[15]  Lucy A. Suchman,et al.  Do categories have politics? , 1993, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[16]  Patrick Dunleavy,et al.  New public management is dead. Long live digital-era governance , 2005 .

[17]  Sarita Albagli,et al.  Memory Practices in the Sciences , 2008 .

[18]  David Bawden,et al.  Memory Practices in the Sciences , 2007 .

[19]  Helena Karasti,et al.  Enriching the Notion of Data Curation in E-Science: Data Managing and Information Infrastructuring in the Long Term Ecological Research (LTER) Network , 2006, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[20]  Marc Berg,et al.  The Electronic Patient Record as a Meaningful Audit Tool:Accountability and Autonomy in General Practitioner Work , 2007 .

[21]  Ann Zimmerman,et al.  New Knowledge from Old Data , 2008 .

[22]  Charles Anderson,et al.  The end of theory: The data deluge makes the scientific method obsolete , 2008 .

[23]  Charlotte P. Lee,et al.  Collaboration in Metagenomics: Sequence Databases and the Organization of Scientific Work , 2009, ECSCW.

[24]  Ixchel M. Faniel,et al.  Reusing Scientific Data: How Earthquake Engineering Researchers Assess the Reusability of Colleagues’ Data , 2010, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[25]  Mark S. Ackerman,et al.  Doctors and psychosocial information: records and reuse in inpatient care , 2010, CHI.

[26]  G. Redden,et al.  My School, Education, and Cultures of Rating and Ranking , 2012 .

[27]  Erik Brynjolfsson,et al.  Big data: the management revolution. , 2012, Harvard business review.

[28]  Christine L. Borgman,et al.  The conundrum of sharing research data , 2012, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[29]  L. Gitelman "Raw Data" Is an Oxymoron , 2013 .

[30]  Charlotte P. Lee,et al.  Beyond trust and reliability: reusing data in collaborative cancer epidemiology research , 2013, CSCW.

[31]  Lisa Gitelman,et al.  Data Bite Man: The Work of Sustaining a Long-Term Study , 2013 .

[32]  Solon Barocas,et al.  Governing Algorithms: A Provocation Piece , 2013 .

[33]  Lisa Gitelman Data Bite Man: The Work of Sustaining a Long-Term Study , 2013 .

[34]  Stacey A. Rutledge,et al.  The Infrastructure of Accountability: Data Use and the Transformation of American Education. , 2013 .

[35]  Lada A. Adamic,et al.  Computational Social Science , 2009, Science.

[36]  James Mussell Raw Data is an Oxymoron , 2014 .

[37]  Kathleen H. Pine,et al.  Emerging Insights on Building Infrastructure for Data-Driven Transparency and Accountability of Organizations , 2015 .