Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Architecture-Driven Development of an Electronic Health Record Considering the SOAQM Quality Model

  • Original Research
  • Published:
SN Computer Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Publisher Correction to this article was published on 28 September 2023

This article has been updated

Abstract

Service computing has been considered for many years a suitable solution to develop and integrate legacy systems. Considering the important role of services for integrating legacy systems in organizations, quality should be treated as a key issue. By observing previous works published in the literature, it is clear that there is a need for the development of a specific quality model for Service-Oriented Architecture based on the latest ISO/IEC 25010 standard. This article presents a SOA quality model, named SOAQM, multiple architecture views and design decisions for developing an electronic health record (EHR). Most often, quality aspects, architectural views and decisions are neglected during the EHR development, which leads to difficulties for future software maintenance. Even those studies which present the software architecture only describe one or two views, or even a multiple number of views in only one box diagram, which may be confusing for most stakeholders. The process proposed in this article to develop the EHR system includes definition of software architecture through architectural decisions, multiple views and UML and SoaML models. The set of architectural decisions defined to develop the EHR was guided by SOAQM. A technical evaluation was performed by a group of eight software specialists that analyzed the EHR process development through a technical report and then provided their opinions through questionnaires and interviews. As a result of this evaluation, the EHR development process guided by the SOAQM quality model is considered important as it regards quality attributes in software development since early stages.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

References

  1. Erl T. SOA principles of service design, (The Prentice Hall service-oriented computing series from Thomas Erl). Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Russell D, Looker N, Liu L, Xu J. Service-oriented integration of systems for military capability. In: 2008 11th IEEE international symposium on object and component-oriented real-time distributed computing (ISORC); 2008. p. 33–41.

  3. Haux R. Health information systems past, present, future. Int J Med Inform. 2006;75(3):268–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Heeks R. Health information systems: failure, success and improvisation. Int J Med Inform. 2006;75(2):125–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Reis LF, Ferreira DG, Maranhao PA, Cruz-Correia R, Vieira-Marques P. Integration through mapping an openEHR based approach for research oriented integration of health information systems. In: 2018 13th Iberian conference on information systems and technologies (CISTI); 2018. p. 1–5.

  6. Cuellar AM, Alonso EC, Agirre A, Susperregi JM, Gamez J. Upgrading legacy EHR systems to smart EHR systems. In: Howlett RJ, Jain LC, Tanaka S, Chen YW, editors. 5th KES international conference on innovation in medicine and healthcare, InMed-17, vol. 71. Berlin: Springer; 2017. p. 227–33.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Razavian M, Lago P. A systematic literature review on SOA migration. J Softw Evol Process. 2015;27(5):337–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Serrano N, Hernantes J, Gallardo G. Service-oriented architecture and legacy systems. IEEE Softw. 2014;31(5):15–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Khadka R, Batlajery BV, Saeidi AM, Jansen S, Hage J. How do professionals perceive legacy systems and software modernization? In: Proceedings of the 36th international conference on software engineering, ICSE 2014; 2014. p. 36–47.

  10. França J, Lima JS, Soares MS. Development of an electronic health record application using a multiple view service oriented architecture. In: Proceedings of the 19th international conference on enterprise information systems—volume 2, ICEIS 2017; 2017. p. 308–315.

  11. Sittig DF, Wright A, Coiera E, Magrabi F, Ratwani R, Bates DW, Singh H. Current challenges in health information technology related patient safety. Health Inform J. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1177/1460458218814893.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Whalen K, Lynch E, Moawad I, John T, Lozowski D, Cummings BM. Transition to a new electronic health record and pediatric medication safety: lessons learned in pediatrics within a large academic health system. JAMIA. 2018;25(7):848–54.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Ash JS, Singh H, Wright A, Chase D, Sittig DF. Essential activities for electronic health record safety: a qualitative study. Health Inform J. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1177/1460458219833109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. ISO, ISO 20514:2005 health informatics, electronic health record—definition, scope and context; 2005.

  15. Nguyen L, Bellucci E, Nguyen LT. Electronic health records implementation: an evaluation of information system impact and contingency factors. I. J Med Inform. 2014;83(11):779–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Papazoglou MP, Traverso P, Dustdar S, Leymann F. Service-oriented computing: state of the art and research challenges. Computer. 2007;40(11):38–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Khadka R, Saeidi A, Jansen S, Hage J, Haas GP. Migrating a large scale legacy application to SOA: challenges and lessons learned. In: 2013 20th working conference on reverse engineering (WCRE); 2013. p. 425–432.

  18. Du X, Song W, Munro M. A method for transforming existing web service descriptions into an enhanced semantic web service framework. Boston: Springer; 2010. p. 217–26.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Khadka R, Saeidi A, Idu A, Hage J, Jansen S. Legacy to SOA evolution: a systematic literature review. In Ionita AD, Litoiu M, Lewis G, editors. Migrating legacy applications: challenges in service oriented architecture and cloud computing environments; 2013.

  20. Ahmed MM, Letchmunan S. A systematic literature review on challenges in service oriented software engineering. Int J Softw Eng Appl (IJSEIA). 2015;9(6):173–86.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Al-Jaroodi J, Mohamed N. Service-oriented architecture for big data analytics in smart cities. In: 18th IEEE/ACM international symposium on cluster, cloud and grid computing (CCGRID). 2018; 2018. p. 633–40.

  22. Jureta IJ, Herssens C, Faulkner S. A comprehensive quality model for service-oriented systems. Software Qual J. 2009;17(1):65–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Oriol M, Marco J, Franch X. Quality models for web services: a systematic mapping. Inf Softw Technol. 2014;56(10):1167–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. ISO, ISO/IEC 25010—systems and software engineering—systems and software quality requirements and evaluation (SQuaRE)—system and software quality models; 2011.

  25. França JMS, Soares MS. SOAQM: quality model for SOA applications based on ISO 25010. In: Proceedings of the 17th international conference on enterprise information systems—volume 2, ICEIS 2015; 2015. p. 60–70.

  26. OMG. Service oriented architecture modeling language (SoaML) specification. Technical report 1.01, OMG; 2012.

  27. Bell M. Service-oriented modeling (SOA): service analysis, design, and architecture. Berlin: Wiley; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Rozanski N, Woods E. Software systems architecture: working with stakeholders using viewpoints and perspectives. New York: Pearson Education; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Cooke RM. Experts in uncertainty: opinion and subjective probability in science. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  30. ISO, ISO/IEC 9126-1: software engineering-product quality-part 1: quality model. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization 21.

  31. OASIS, Quality Model for Web Services (WSQM2.0); 2005.

  32. Ameller D, Franch X. Service level agreement monitor (SALMon). In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on composition-based software systems (ICCBSS); 2008. p. 224–7.

  33. Metzger A, Chi C, Engel Y, Marconi A. Research challenges on online service quality prediction for proactive adaptation. In: 1st international workshop on European software services and systems research—results and challenges, S-Cube 2012, Zurich, Switzerland, June 5, 2012; 2012. p. 51–7.

  34. Yin B, Yang H, Fu P, Chen X. A semantic web services discovery algorithm based on QoS ontology. In: Proceedings of the 6th international conference on active media technology, AMT’10; 2010. p. 166–73.

  35. Nadanam P, Rajmohan R. QoS evaluation for web services in cloud computing. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on computing communication and networking technologies (ICCCNT); 2012. p. 1–8.

  36. Goeb A, Lochmann K. A software quality model for SOA. In: Proceedingsof the 8th international workshop on software quality, WoSQ’11; 2011. p. 18–25.

  37. Bosch J. Software architecture: the next step. In: EWSA, vol. 3047 of lecture notes in computer science. Berlin: Springer; 2004. p. 194–199.

  38. Jansen A, Bosch J. Software architecture as a set of architectural design decisions. In: Proceedings of the 5th working IEEE/IFIP conference on software architecture, WICSA’05; 2005. p. 109–20.

  39. Babar MA, Dingsyr T, Lago P, van Vliet H. Software architecture knowledge management: theory and practice. 1st ed. Berlin: Springer; 2009.

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  40. Shahin M, Liang P, Khayyambashi M.-R. Architectural design decision: existing models and tools. In: WICSA/ECSA. New York: IEEE; 2009. p. 293–6.

  41. Gu Q, Lago P. SOA process decisions: new challenges in architectural knowledge modeling. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international workshop on sharing and reusing architectural knowledge, SHARK’08. New York: ACM; 2008, p. 3–10.

  42. Gu Q, Lago P, van Vliet H. A Template for SOA design decision making in an educational setting. In: Proceedings of the 2010 36th EUROMICRO conference on software engineering and advanced applications, SEAA’10. Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society; 2010. p. 175–82.

  43. ISO. ISO/IEC 42010—systems and software engineering—architecture description; 2011.

  44. Costa Junior A, Misra S, Soares MS. A systematic mapping study on software architectures description based on ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010:2011. In: Computational science and its applications? ICCSA 2019, 2019, Saint Petersburg. Lecture notes in computer science, 2019, ICCSA 2019; 2019. p. 17–30.

  45. Kruchten P. The \(4+1\) view model of architecture. IEEE Softw. 1995;12(6):42–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Cho I, Kim J, Kim J, Kim HY, Kim Y. Design and implementation of a standards-based interoperable clinical decision support architecture in the context of the Korean EHR. Int J Med Inform. 2010;79(9):611–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. El-Sappagh SH, El-Masri S. A distributed clinical decision support system architecture. J King Saud Univ Comput Inf Sci. 2014;26(1):69–78.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Traore BB, Kamsu-Foguem B, Tangara F. Integrating MDA and SOA for improving telemedicine services. Telemat Inform. 2016;33(3):733–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Moor GD, Sundgren M, Kalra D, Schmidt A, Dugas M, Claerhout B, Karakoyun T, Ohmann C, Lastic P-Y, Ammour N, Kush R, Dupont D, Cuggia M, Daniel C, Thienpont G, Coorevits P. Using electronic health records for clinical research: the case of the EHR4CR project. J Biomed Inform. 2015;53:162–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Fabian B, Ermakova T, Junghanns P. Collaborative and secure sharing of healthcare data in multi-clouds. Inf Syst. 2015;48:132–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Gazzarata G, Gazzarata R, Giacomini M. A Standardized SOA based solution to guarantee the secure access to EHR. Proc Comput Sci. 2015;64:1124–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Blobel B. Ontology driven health information systems architectures enable pHealth for empowered patients. Int J Med Inform. 2011;80(2):17–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Monsieur G, Snoeck M, Lemahieu W. Managing data dependencies in service compositions. J Syst Softw. 2012;85(11):2604–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Wu B, Chi C-H, Chen Z, Gu M, Sun J. Workflow-based resource allocation to optimize overall performance of composite services. Fut Gener Comput Syst. 2009;25(3):199–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Perepletchikov M, Ryan C. A controlled experiment for evaluating the impact of coupling on the maintainability of service-oriented software. IEEE Trans Softw Eng. 2011;37(4):449–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Mohammadi M, Mukhtar M. A review of SOA modeling approaches for enterprise information systems. Proc Technol. 2013;11:794–800 (4th international conference on electrical engineering and informatics, ICEEI 2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Tian Y, Huang M. Enhance discovery and retrieval of geospatial data using SOA and semantic web technologies. Expert Syst Appl. 2012;39(16):12522–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Granell C, Díaz L, Gould M. Service-oriented applications for environmental models: reusable geospatial services. Environ Model Softw. 2010;25(2):182–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. King G-H, Cai Z-Y, Lu Y-Y, Wu J-J, Shih H-P, Chang C-R. A high-performance multi-user service system for financial analytics based on web service and GPU computation. In: International symposium on parallel and distributed processing with applications (ISPA); 2010. p. 327–33.

  60. Vescoukis V, Dulamis ND. Disaster management evaluation and recommendation. In: Conference in games and virtual worlds for serious applications (VS-GAMES); 2011. p. 244–9.

  61. García-Sánchez P, García Arenas MI, Mora AM, Castillo PA, Fernandes C, de las Cuevas P, Romero G, González J, Merelo JJ. Developing services in a service oriented architecture for evolutionary algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 15th annual conference companion on genetic and evolutionary computation, GECCO’13 Companion; 2013. p. 1341–8.

  62. Kabir MA, Han J, Colman AW. SocioTelematics: harnessing social interaction–relationships in developing automotive applications. Pervasive Mobile Comput. 2014;14:129–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Salgado CE, Teixeira J, Santos N, Machado RJ, Maciel RSP. A SoaML approach for derivation of a process-oriented logical architecture from use cases. In: Exploring services science—6th international conference, IESS 2015, Porto, Portugal, February 4–6, 2015, proceedings; 2015. p. 80–94.

  64. França JMS, Lima JDS, Soares MS. A case study on SoaML to design an electronic health record application considering integration of legacy systems. In: 2016 IEEE 40th annual computer software and applications conference (COMPSAC), Vol. 1; 2016. p. 353–8.

  65. Santos N, Rodrigues H, Pereira J, Morais F, Martins R, Ferreira N, Abreu R, Machado RJ. Specifying software services for fog computing architectures using recursive model transformations. Berlin: Springer; 2018. p. 153–81.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Delgado A, Ruiz F, de Guzmán IGR. A reference model-driven architecture linking business processes and services. In: 51st Hawaii international conference on system sciences, HICSS 2018, Hilton Waikoloa Village, Hawaii; 2018.

  67. Soares MS, França JMS. Characterization of the application of service-oriented design principles in practice: a systematic literature review. J Softw. 2016;11(4):403–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. O’Brien L, Merson P, Bass L. Quality attributes for service-oriented architectures. In: Proceedings of the international workshop on systems development in SOA environments, SDSOA’07. Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society; 2007.

  69. Papazoglou MP, Traverso P, Dustdar S, Leymann F. Service-oriented computing: a research roadmap. Int J Cooper Inf Syst. 2008;17(2):223–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Funding was provided by Fundação de Apoio à Pesquisa e à Inovação Tecnológica do Estado de Sergipe (Grant No. 2018).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Federal Institute of Education, Science and Technology of Norte de Minas Gerais, Porteirinha, Brazil

    Joyce M. S. França

  2. Department of Computing, Federal University of Sergipe, São Cristóvão, Brazil

    Ademir Almeida da Costa Junior & Michel S. Soares

Authors
  1. Joyce M. S. França
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ademir Almeida da Costa Junior
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michel S. Soares
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michel S. Soares.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Fully documented templates are available in the elsarticle package on CTAN.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

França, J.M.S., da Costa Junior, A.A. & Soares, M.S. Architecture-Driven Development of an Electronic Health Record Considering the SOAQM Quality Model. SN COMPUT. SCI. 1, 140 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42979-020-00150-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42979-020-00150-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy