ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2003
The electronic patient record in primary care--regression or progression? A cross sectional study.
Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 57 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
57 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Impact of electronic medical record on physician practice in office settings: a systematic review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2012Pooled it
- Quality of medication use in primary care--mapping the problem, working to a solution: a systematic review of the literature.BMC medicine · 2009Pooled it
- The impact of the electronic medical record on structure, process, and outcomes within primary care: a systematic review of the evidence.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIAPooled it
- A randomized trial of the effectiveness of on-demand versus computer-triggered drug decision support in primary care.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIATrial
- Application of digital simulations for clinical assessment and documentation of temporomandibular disorders: a retrospective study.Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology and oral radiology · 2026Article
- Disease management teams in oncology: State of the art and the experience of a scientific institute of hospitalization and treatment (IRCCS) in Rome, Italy.Brain, behavior, & immunity - health · 2025Article
- Severe mental illness, race/ethnicity, multimorbidity and mortality following COVID-19 infection: nationally representative cohort study.The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science · 2023Article
- 3-Dimensional simulations and student learning in orthodontic education.European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe · 2022Article
- Application of Three-Dimensional Digital Technology in Orthodontics: The State of the Art.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- How Do Patients Want Us to Use the Computer During Medical Encounters?-A Discrete Choice Experiment Study.Journal of general internal medicine · 2021Article
- Medicines reconciliation in primary care: a study evaluating the quality of medication-related information provided on discharge from secondary care.European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice · 2020Article
- Investigating the epidemiology of medication errors in adults in community care settings. A retrospective cohort study in central Saudi Arabia.Saudi medical journal · 2019Article
- What factors influence the use of electronic health records during the first 10 minutes of the clinical encounter?International journal of general medicine · 2018Article
- Electronic Implementation of Integrated End-of-life Care: A Local Approach.International journal of integrated care · 2017Article
- Learning to use electronic health records: can we stay patient-centered? A pre-post intervention study with family medicine residents.BMC family practice · 2017Article
- Development of Clinical Data Mart of HMG-CoA Reductase Inhibitor for Varied Clinical Research.Endocrinology and metabolism (Seoul, Korea) · 2017Article
- Automated identification of patients with a diagnosis of binge eating disorder from narrative electronic health records.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2014Article
- Development and initial validation of a content taxonomy for patient records in general dentistry.International journal of medical informatics · 2013Article
- Regional epidemiologic assessment of prevalent periodontitis using an electronic health record system.American journal of epidemiology · 2013Article
- Evaluation of Electronic Medical Record (EMR) at large urban primary care sexual health centre.PloS one · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo determine whether paperless medical records contained less information than paper based medical records and whether that information was harder to retrieve.
designCross sectional study with review of medical records and interviews with general practitioners.
setting25 general practices in Trent region.
participants53 British general practitioners (25 using paperless records and 28 using paper based records) who each provided records of 10 consultations.
main outcome measuresContent of a sample of records and doctor recall of consultations for which paperless or paper based records had been made.
resultsCompared with paper based records, more paperless records were fully understandable (89.2% v 69.9%, P=0.0001) and fully legible (100% v 64.3%, P < 0.0001). Paperless records were significantly more likely to have at least one diagnosis recorded (48.2% v 33.2%, P=0.05), to record that advice had been given (23.7% vs 10.7%, P=0.017), and, when a referral had been made, were more likely to contain details of the specialty (77.4% v 59.5%, P=0.03). When a prescription had been issued, paperless records were more likely to specify the drug dose (86.6% v 66.2%, P=0.005). Paperless records contained significantly more words, abbreviations, and symbols (P < 0.01 for all). At doctor interview, there was no difference between the groups for the proportion of patients or consultations that could be recalled. Doctors using paperless records were able to recall more advice given to patients (38.6% v 26.8%, P=0.03).
conclusionWe found no evidence to support our hypotheses that paperless records would be truncated and contain more local abbreviations; and that the absence of writing would decrease subsequent recall. Conversely we found that the paperless records compared favourably with manual records.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.