Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22527782›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical systems2012

Using electronic medical record systems for admission decisions in emergency departments: examining the crowdedness effect.

Ofir Ben-Assuli, Moshe Leshno, Itamar Shabtai

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical systems, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ofir Ben-AssuliOno Academic College, Kiryat Ono 55451, Israel. ofir.benassuli@gmail.com
Moshe Leshno
Itamar Shabtai
College of Management Academic Studies · ILOno Academic College · ILTel Aviv University · IL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many medical organizations have deployed electronic medical record (EMR) information systems (IS) to improve medical decision-making and increase efficiency. Despite their advantages, however, EMR IS may make less of a contribution in the stressful environment of an emergency department (ED) that operates under tight time constraints. The high level of crowdedness in the EDs itself can cause physicians to make medical decisions resulting in more unnecessary admissions and fewer necessary admissions. Thus this study evaluated the contribution of an EMR IS to physicians by investigating whether EMR IS leads to improved medical outcomes in points of care in EDs under different levels of crowdedness. For this purpose a track log-file analysis of a database containing 3.2 million ED referrals in seven main hospitals in Israel (the whole population in these hospitals) was conducted. The findings suggest that viewing medical history via the EMR IS leads to better admission decisions, and reduces the number of possibly avoidable single-day admissions. Furthermore, although the ED can be very stressful especially on crowded days, physicians used EMR IS more on crowded days than on non-crowded days. These results have implications as regards the viability of EMR IS in complex, fast-paced environments.

Indexed as

CrowdingDecision Making, Computer-AssistedElectronic Health RecordsEmergency Service, HospitalPatient AdmissionHumansIsraelLogistic Models

Identifiers

PMID22527782
OpenAlexW1995420119

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.