ReviewPhysiotherapy research international : the journal for researchers and clinicians in physical therapy2015
Possibilities and Implications of Using the ICF and Other Vocabulary Standards in Electronic Health Records.
Review in Physiotherapy research international : the journal for researchers and clinicians in physical therapy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic review of the use and challenges of electronic health records in physiotherapy practice.BMJ open · 2025Pooled it
- The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) in Electronic Health Records. A Systematic Literature Review.Applied clinical informatics · 2017Pooled it
- Agreement Between Single Raters and Team Rating When Applying the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health's Rehabilitation Set.Journal of rehabilitation medicine · 2023Article
- A roadmap to reduce information inequities in disability with digital health and natural language processing.PLOS digital health · 2022Review
- Integrating a New Dietetic Care Process in a Health Information System: A System and Process Analysis and Assessment.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Linking Free Text Documentation of Functioning and Disability to the ICF With Natural Language Processing.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2021Article
- Automated Coding of Under-Studied Medical Concept Domains: Linking Physical Activity Reports to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health.Frontiers in digital health · 2021Article
- Using a Mobile App-Based International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health Set to Assess the Functioning of Spinal Cord Injury Patients: Rasch Analysis.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2020Article
- Towards a nationwide implementation of a standardized nutrition and dietetics terminology in clinical practice: a pre-implementation focus group study including a pretest and using the consolidated framework for implementation research.BMC health services research · 2019Article
- Broadening horizons: the case for capturing function and the role of health informatics in its use.BMC public health · 2019Article
- Documenting Routinely What Matters to People: Standardized Headings for Health Records of Patients with Chronic Health Conditions.Applied clinical informatics · 2018Article
- What incentives increase data sharing in health and medical research? A systematic review.Research integrity and peer review · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
There is now widespread recognition of the powerful potential of electronic health record (EHR) systems to improve the health-care delivery system. The benefits of EHRs grow even larger when the health data within their purview are seamlessly shared, aggregated and processed across different providers, settings and institutions. Yet, the plethora of idiosyncratic conventions for identifying the same clinical content in different information systems is a fundamental barrier to fully leveraging the potential of EHRs. Only by adopting vocabulary standards that provide the lingua franca across these local dialects can computers efficiently move, aggregate and use health data for decision support, outcomes management, quality reporting, research and many other purposes. In this regard, the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) is an important standard for physiotherapists because it provides a framework and standard language for describing health and health-related states. However, physiotherapists and other health-care professionals capture a wide range of data such as patient histories, clinical findings, tests and measurements, procedures, and so on, for which other vocabulary standards such as Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes and Systematized Nomenclature Of Medicine Clinical Terms are crucial for interoperable communication between different electronic systems. In this paper, we describe how the ICF and other internationally accepted vocabulary standards could advance physiotherapy practise and research by enabling data sharing and reuse by EHRs. We highlight how these different vocabulary standards fit together within a comprehensive record system, and how EHRs can make use of them, with a particular focus on enhancing decision-making. By incorporating the ICF and other internationally accepted vocabulary standards into our clinical information systems, physiotherapists will be able to leverage the potent capabilities of EHRs and contribute our unique clinical perspective to other health-care providers within the emerging electronic health information infrastructure.
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.