ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2008
Introduction of shared electronic records: multi-site case study using diffusion of innovation theory.
Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers, 6 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
62 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Defining and assessing context in healthcare implementation studies: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2020Pooled it
- The role and benefits of accessing primary care patient records during unscheduled care: a systematic review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2017Pooled it
- Case management for dementia in primary health care: a systematic mixed studies review based on the diffusion of innovation model.Clinical interventions in aging · 2014Pooled it
- Comparison of user groups' perspectives of barriers and facilitators to implementing electronic health records: a systematic review.BMC medicine · 2011Pooled it
- The impact of eHealth on the quality and safety of health care: a systematic overview.PLoS medicine · 2011Pooled it
- Tensions and paradoxes in electronic patient record research: a systematic literature review using the meta-narrative method.The Milbank quarterly · 2009Pooled it
- What Can We Learn From Nurses' Experiences of Digital Technology Implementation During the COVID-19 Pandemic? A Qualitative Study.Journal of clinical nursing · 2026Article
- Seven Dimensions Are Not Enough: Actively Disseminating Applied Behavior Analysis.Perspectives on behavior science · 2025Article
- Developing the MyCancerGene Digital Health Portal to Improve Patients' Understanding of Germline Cancer Genetic Test Results: Development, User, and Usability Testing Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- 25 Years of Electronic Health Record Implementation Processes: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Acceptance of artificial intelligence clinical assistant decision support system to prevent and control venous thromboembolism among healthcare workers: an extend Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology Model.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Evaluation of Digitalisation in Healthcare and the Quantification of the "Unmeasurable".Journal of general internal medicine · 2023Article
- The Large-Scale Implementation of a Health Information System in Brazilian University Hospitals: Process and Outcomes.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Exploring facilitators of the implementation of electronic health records in Saudi Arabia.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2022Article
- The Role of Personality and Top Management Support in Continuance Intention to Use Electronic Health Record Systems among Nurses.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- State-of-art review of information diffusion models and their impact on social network vulnerabilities.Journal of King Saud University. Computer and information sciences · 2022Review
- The impact financial resources on implementation of large-scale electronic health records in the Saudi Arabia's primary healthcare centers: Mixed methods.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Patterns of health information exchange strategies underlying health information technologies capabilities building.Health systems (Basingstoke, England) · 2022Article
- Driving digital health transformation in hospitals: a formative qualitative evaluation of the English Global Digital Exemplar programme.BMJ health & care informatics · 2021Article
- Identifying relevant factors for successful implementation into routine practice: expert interviews to inform a heart failure self-care intervention (ACHIEVE study).BMC health services research · 2021Article
2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo explore the introduction of a centrally stored, shared electronic patient record (the summary care record (SCR)) in England and draw wider lessons about the implementation of large scale information technology projects in health care.
designMulti-site, mixed method case study applying utilisation focused evaluation.
settingFour early adopter sites for the SCR in England-three in urban areas of relative socioeconomic deprivation and the fourth in a relatively affluent rural area. Data sources and analysis Data included 250 staff interviews, 1500 hours of ethnographic observation, interviews and focus groups with 170 patients and carers, 2500 pages of correspondence and documentary evidence, and incorporation of relevant surveys and statistics produced by others. These were analysed by using a thematic approach drawing on (and extending) a theoretical model of complex change developed in a previous systematic review. Main findings The mixed fortunes of the SCR programme in its first year were largely explained by eight interacting influences. The first was the SCR's material properties (especially technical immaturity and lack of interoperability) and attributes (especially the extent to which potential adopters believed the benefits outweighed the risks). The second was adopters' concerns (especially about workload and the ethicality of sharing "confidential" information on an implied consent model). The third influence was interpersonal influence (for example, opinion leaders, champions, facilitators), and the fourth was organisational antecedents for innovation (for example past experience with information technology projects, leadership and management capacity, effective data capture systems, slack resources). The fifth was organisational readiness for the SCR (for example, innovation-system fit, tension for change, power balances between supporters and opponents, baseline data quality). The sixth was the implementation process (including the nature of the change model and the extent to which new routines associated with the SCR aligned with existing organisational routines). The seventh influence was the nature and quality of links between different parts of the system, and the final one was the wider environment (especially the political context of the programme).
conclusionShared electronic records are not plug-in technologies. They are complex innovations that must be accepted by individual patients and staff and also embedded in organisational and inter-organisational routines. This process is heavily influenced at the micro-level by the material properties of the technology, individuals' attitudes and concerns, and interpersonal influence; at the meso-level by organisational antecedents, readiness, and operational aspects of implementation; and at the macro-level by institutional and socio-political forces. A case study approach and multi-level theoretical analysis can illuminate how contextual factors shape, enable, and constrain new, technology supported models of patient care.
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.