ArticleJournal of medical systems2010
Benchmarking electronic medical records initiatives in the US: a conceptual model.
Article in Journal of medical systems, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Acceptability and Efficacy of Electronic Data Collection in a Hospital Neurodevelopmental Clinic: Pilot Questionnaire Study.JMIR formative research · 2021Article
- National monitoring and evaluation of eHealth: a scoping review.JAMIA open · 2020Article
- Validation of a nurses' views on electronic medical record systems (EMR) questionnaire in Turkish health system.Journal of medical systems · 2015Article
- The clinical adoption meta-model: a temporal meta-model describing the clinical adoption of health information systems.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2014Article
- Understanding electronic medical record adoption in the United States: communication and sociocultural perspectives.Interactive journal of medical research · 2013Article
- A generative tool for building health applications driven by ISO 13606 archetypes.Journal of medical systems · 2012Article
- Electronic hand-drafting and picture management system.Journal of medical systems · 2012Article
- Seoul National University Bundang Hospital's Electronic System for Total Care.Healthcare informatics research · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article provides a conceptual model for benchmarking the use of clinical information systems within healthcare organizations. Additionally, it addresses the benefits of clinical information systems which include the reduction of errors, improvement in clinical decision-making and real time access to patient information. The literature suggests that clinical information systems provide financial benefits due to cost-savings from improved efficiency and reduction of errors. As a result, healthcare organizations should adopt such clinical information systems to improve quality of care and stay competitive in the marketplace. Our research clearly documents the increased adoption of electronic medical records in U.S. hospitals from 2005 to 2007. This is important because the electronic medical record provides an opportunity for integration of patient information and improvements in efficiency and quality of care across a wide range of patient populations. This was supported by recent federal initiatives such as the establishment of the Office of the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology (ONCHIT) to create an interoperable health information infrastructure. Potential barriers to the implementation of health information technology include cost, a lack of financial incentives for providers, and a need for interoperable systems. As a result, future government involvement and leadership may serve to accelerate widespread adoption of interoperable clinical information systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
20503611What 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.