ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2009
Physicians' attitudes towards copy and pasting in electronic note writing.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 60 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
60 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Optimizing Clinical Decision Support System Functionality by Leveraging Specific Human-Computer Interaction Elements: Insights From a Systematic Review.JMIR human factors · 2025Pooled it
- Clinicians' reasoning as reflected in electronic clinical note-entry and reading/retrieval: a systematic review and qualitative synthesis.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2019Pooled it
- Safe Practices for Copy and Paste in the EHR. Systematic Review, Recommendations, and Novel Model for Health IT Collaboration.Applied clinical informatics · 2017Pooled it
- Impact of Scribes on Physician Satisfaction, Patient Satisfaction, and Charting Efficiency: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Annals of family medicine · 2017Trial
- Electronic versus dictated hospital discharge summaries: a randomized controlled trial.Journal of general internal medicine · 2009Trial
- Improving Psychiatric History-Taking Documentation: A Quality Improvement Audit and Re-Audit.Cureus · 2026Article
- Toward Safer Diagnoses: A SEIPS-Based Narrative Review of Diagnostic Errors.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Copy Tools in the Electronic Health Record: Perceptions, Implications, and Future Directions.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Article
- Development of an electronic system for self/proxy symptom tracking alongside children with cancer and their caregivers: a co-design exemplar.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Article
- Exploring Provider Perceptions and Attitudes toward Copy-Paste and Copy-Forward in Clinical Documentation.Applied clinical informatics · 2025Article
- Addressing Note Bloat: Solutions for Effective Clinical Documentation.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2025Article
- Nurses' Perceptions and Recommendations on the Safe Use of "Copy and Paste" Function in an Electronic Medical Record of a National Tertiary Hospital.Acta medica Philippina · 2025Article
- Copying in medical documentation: developing an evidence-based approach.Internal medicine journal · 2025Article
- Time and Note Characteristic Effects of an Electronic Health Record Template for Internal Medicine Resident Notes.Journal of graduate medical education · 2024Article
- Patient Information Summarization in Clinical Settings: Scoping Review.JMIR medical informatics · 2023Article
- Copy-Pasting in Patients' Electronic Medical Records (EMRs): Use Judiciously and With Caution.Cureus · 2023Review
- Physician Note Composition Patterns and Time on the EHR Across Specialty Types: a National, Cross-sectional Study.Journal of general internal medicine · 2023Article
- Automating Electronic Health Record Data Quality Assessment.Journal of medical systems · 2023Review
- Disappearing Help Text: Implementing a Note-Based Tool for In-Line Clinical Decision Support and Note Bloat Reduction.Applied clinical informatics · 2022Article
- Restricted use of copy and paste in electronic health records potentially improves healthcare quality.Medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe ability to copy and paste text within computerized physician documentation facilitates electronic note writing, but may affect the quality of physician notes and patient care. Little is known about physicians' collective experience with the copy and paste function (CPF).
objectivesTo determine physicians' CPF use, perceptions of its impact on notes and patient care, and opinions regarding its future use.
designCross-sectional survey.
participantsResident and faculty physicians within two affiliated academic medical centers currently using a computerized documentation system. MEASUREMENTS: Responses on a self-administered survey.
resultsA total of 315 (70%) of 451 eligible physicians responded to the survey. Of the 253 (80%) physicians who wrote inpatient notes electronically, 226 (90%) used CPF, and 177 (70%) used it almost always or most of the time when writing daily progress notes. While noting that inconsistencies (71%) and outdated information (71%) were more common in notes containing copy and pasted text, few physicians felt that CPF had a negative impact on patient documentation (19%) or led to mistakes in patient care (24%). The majority of physicians (80%) wanted to continue to use CPF.
conclusionsAlthough recognizing deficits in notes written using CPF, the majority of physicians used CPF to write notes and did not perceive an overall negative impact on physician documentation or patient care. Further studies of the effects of electronic note writing on the quality and safety of patient care are required.
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.