Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26500106›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2015

Disrupting Electronic Health Records Systems: The Next Generation.

Leo Anthony Celi, Jeffrey David Marshall, Yuan Lai, David J Stone

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Electronically assisted surveillance systems of healthcare-associated infections: a systematic review.Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Can emergency department provider notes help to achieve more dynamic clinical decision support?Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2020
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. 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

4 authors.

Leo Anthony CeliBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine, Boston, MA, United States. lceli@bidmc.harvard.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6712-6626

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The health care system suffers from both inefficient and ineffective use of data. Data are suboptimally displayed to users, undernetworked, underutilized, and wasted. Errors, inefficiencies, and increased costs occur on the basis of unavailable data in a system that does not coordinate the exchange of information, or adequately support its use. Clinicians' schedules are stretched to the limit and yet the system in which they work exerts little effort to streamline and support carefully engineered care processes. Information for decision-making is difficult to access in the context of hurried real-time workflows. This paper explores and addresses these issues to formulate an improved design for clinical workflow, information exchange, and decision making based on the use of electronic health records.

Indexed as

clinical decision makingclinical decision supportelectronic health recordselectronic notes

Identifiers

PMID26500106
PMCPMC4704959

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.