ArticleApplied clinical informatics2014
Determining primary care physician information needs to inform ambulatory visit note display.
Article in Applied clinical informatics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled 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
- Effect of Outpatient Note Templates on Note Quality: NOTE (Notation Optimization through Template Engineering) Randomized Clinical Trial.Journal of general internal medicine · 2021Trial
- Finding the Value: Identifying the Key Elements of Recorded Clinic Visits From the Perspective of Patients, Clinicians, and Caregivers.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Involving Health Care Professionals in the Development of Electronic Health Records: Scoping Review.JMIR human factors · 2023Article
- Electronic Health Records' Support for Primary Care Physicians' Situation Awareness: A Metanarrative Review.Human factors · 2023Review
- Integrated displays to improve chronic disease management in ambulatory care: A SMART on FHIR application informed by mixed-methods user testing.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2020Article
- A Daily Hospital Progress Note that Increases Physician Usability of the Electronic Health Record by Facilitating a Problem-Oriented Approach to the Patient and Reducing Physician Clerical Burden.The Permanente journal · 2019Article
- Information needs for the rapid response team electronic clinical tool.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2017Article
- How Does Learnability of Primary Care Resident Physicians Increase After Seven Months of Using an Electronic Health Record? A Longitudinal Study.JMIR human factors · 2016Article
- Foraging for Information in the EHR: The Search for Adherence Related Information by Mental Health Clinicians.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2016Observational
- A Family Medicine Health Technology Strategy for Achieving the Triple Aim for US Health Care.Family medicine · 2015Article
- Variability in Electronic Health Record Usage and Perceptions among Specialty vs. Primary Care Physicians.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWith the increase in the adoption of electronic health records (EHR) across the US, primary care physicians are experiencing information overload. The purpose of this pilot study was to determine the information needs of primary care physicians (PCPs) as they review clinic visit notes to inform EHR display.
methodData collection was conducted with 15 primary care physicians during semi-structured interviews, including a third party observer to control bias. Physicians reviewed major sections of an artificial but typical acute and chronic care visit note to identify the note sections that were relevant to their information needs. Statistical methods used were McNemar-Mosteller's and Cochran Q.
resultsPhysicians identified History of Present Illness (HPI), Assessment, and Plan (A&P) as the most important sections of a visit note. In contrast, they largely judged the Review of Systems (ROS) to be superfluous. There was also a statistical difference in physicians' highlighting among all seven major note sections in acute (p = 0.00) and chronic (p = 0.00) care visit notes.
conclusionA&P and HPI sections were most frequently identified as important which suggests that physicians may have to identify a few key sections out of a long, unnecessarily verbose visit note. ROS is viewed by doctors as mostly "not needed," but can have relevant information. The ROS can contain information needed for patient care when other sections of the Visit note, such as the HPI, lack the relevant information. Future studies should include producing a display that provides only relevant information to increase physician efficiency at the point of care. Also, research on moving A&P to the top of visit notes instead of having A&P at the bottom of the page is needed, since those are usually the first sections physicians refer to and reviewing from top to bottom may cause cognitive load.
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.