Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22813762›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA

Clinical documentation: composition or synthesis?

Lena Mamykina, David K Vawdrey, Peter D Stetson, Kai Zheng, George Hripcsak

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

53 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Measuring Documentation Burden in Healthcare.Journal of general internal medicine · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. An electronic documentation system improves the quality of admission notes: a randomized trial.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2017
    Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

5 authors.

Lena MamykinaDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, USA. lena.mamykina@dbmi.columbia.edu
David K Vawdrey
Peter D Stetson
Kai Zheng
George Hripcsak

Funding

Training in Biomedical Informatics at Columbia UniversityT15LM007079 · NLM · COLUMBIA UNIV NEW YORK MORNINGSIDE · PI NOEMIE ELHADAD, GEORGE M HRIPCSAK · 1992 to 2026
$28.9M
DISCOVERING AND APPLYING KNOWLEDGE IN CLINICAL DATABASESR01LM006910 · NLM · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI HRIPCSAK, GEORGE M · 2000 to 2023
$10.6M
NLM NIH HHS R01 LM006910NLM NIH HHS T15 LM007079
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo understand the nature of emerging electronic documentation practices, disconnects between documentation workflows and computing systems designed to support them, and ways to improve the design of electronic documentation systems. MATERIALS AND

methodsTime-and-motion study of resident physicians' note-writing practices using a commercial electronic health record system that includes an electronic documentation module. The study was conducted in the general medicine unit of a large academic hospital.

resultsDuring the study, 96 note-writing sessions by 11 resident physicians, resulting in close to 100 h of observations were seen. Seven of the 10 most common transitions between activities during note composition were between documenting, and gathering and reviewing patient data, and updating the plan of care. DISCUSSION: The high frequency of transitions seen in the study suggested that clinical documentation is fundamentally a synthesis activity, in which clinicians review available patient data and summarize their impressions and judgments. At the same time, most electronic health record systems are optimized to support documentation as uninterrupted composition. This mismatch leads to fragmentation in clinical work, and results in inefficiencies and workarounds. In contrast, we propose that documentation can be best supported with tools that facilitate data exploration and search for relevant information, selective reading and annotation, and composition of a note as a temporal structure.

conclusionsTime-and-motion study of clinicians' electronic documentation practices revealed a high level of fragmentation of documentation activities and frequent task transitions. Treating documentation as synthesis rather than composition suggests new possibilities for supporting it more effectively with electronic systems.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsPractice Patterns, Physicians'User-Computer InterfaceWorkflowAcademic Medical CentersDocumentationEfficiency, OrganizationalHumansNew York CityTime and Motion Studies

Identifiers

PMID22813762
PMCPMC3534467

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.