QHR Technologies
Canadian healthcare technology company
QHR Technologies Inc. (QHR) is a Canadian healthcare technology company, founded in 2000. It represents 20 percent of the country's medical record market and its Medeo and AccuroEMR products are used by about 16,400 health professionals.
History
In 2013, QHR sold Quadrant to Logibec Groupe Informatique.
In 2014, QHR acquired Medeo, a patient-doctor online connection application developer whose virtual care application is used by about 5,000 physicians in British Columbia.
In 2016, Olympic athlete Hayley Wickenheiser joined QHR as a spokesperson.
In June 2016, QHR announced plans to collaborate with TELUS Health to improve communications between healthcare providers. The companies intend to create a secure electronic communication solution to allow the more than 23,000 Canadian physicians on their EMR platforms to communicate seamlessly, regardless of the EMR platform they're on.
In August 2016, QHR received a $170 million purchase offer from Loblaw Companies, the consortium owning Shopper's Drug Mart, Canada's largest chain of pharmacies. The board approved the offer and QHR was purchased by Loblaw Companies.
The public source identifies “QHR Technologies” as canadian healthcare technology company. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Technologies, Canadian and healthcare.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “QHR Technologies”, the useful work is to connect “canadian healthcare technology company” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
The date and method of observation matter as much as the stated conclusion, especially where classification or consensus has changed. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 22, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q28232863. 2 of 2 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 2000, 2013, 2014 and 2016.
Current terminology should not be projected backward without checking the classification used when the underlying evidence was created. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.
- Current terminology
- Classification context
- Finding cited technical literature
Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “QHR Technologies”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow QHR Technologies primary sources, QHR Technologies archive and Technologies research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “QHR Technologies”?
- Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
- Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “QHR Technologies” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.