Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18373858›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2008

Instant availability of patient records, but diminished availability of patient information: a multi-method study of GP's use of electronic patient records.

Tom Christensen, Anders Grimsmo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. A systematic review of automatic text summarization for biomedical literature and EHRs.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. What's in a Summary? Laying the Groundwork for Advances in Hospital-Course Summarization.Proceedings of the conference. Association for Computational Linguistics. North American Chapter. Meeting · 2021
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Impact of a problem-oriented view on clinical data retrieval.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Clinical relevance of the STOPP/START criteria in hip fracture patients.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2017
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Automated methods for the summarization of electronic health records.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2015
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Tom ChristensenNorwegian EHR Research Centre, Faculty of Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology in Trondheim, MTFS, 7489 Trondheim, Norway. tom.christensen@ntnu.no
Anders Grimsmo

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn spite of successful adoption of electronic patient records (EPR) by Norwegian GPs, what constitutes the actual benefits and effects of the use of EPRs in the perspective of the GPs and patients has not been fully characterized. We wanted to study primary care physicians' use of electronic patient record (EPR) systems in terms of use of different EPR functions and the time spent on using the records, as well as the potential effects of EPR systems on the clinician-patient relationship.

methodsA combined qualitative and quantitative study that uses data collected from focus groups, observations of primary care encounters and a questionnaire survey of a random sample of general practitioners to describe their use of EPR in primary care.

resultsThe overall availability of individual patient records had improved, but the availability of the information within each EPR was not satisfactory. GPs' use of EPRs were efficient and comprehensive, but have resulted in transfer of administrative work from secretaries to physicians. We found no indications of disturbance of the clinician-patient relationship by use of computers in this study.

conclusionAlthough GPs are generally satisfied with their EPRs systems, there are still unmet needs and functionality to be covered. It is urgent to find methods that can make a better representation of information in large patient records as well as prevent EPRs from contributing to increased administrative workload of physicians.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelEfficiency, OrganizationalFamily PracticeFemaleFocus GroupsHumansMaleMedical Records Systems, ComputerizedNeeds AssessmentNorwayObservationPhysicians, FamilyPractice Patterns, Physicians'Process Assessment, Health CareSampling StudiesSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID18373858
PMCPMC2386452

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.