Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2015
Analysis of Documentation Speed Using Web-Based Medical Speech Recognition Technology: Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Measuring Documentation Burden in Healthcare.Journal of general internal medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Evaluation of interventions to improve inpatient hospital documentation within electronic health records: a systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2019Pooled it
- Speech recognition for clinical documentation from 1990 to 2018: a systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2019Pooled it
- Using voice to create hospital progress notes: Description of a mobile application and supporting system integrated with a commercial electronic health record.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2018Trial
- AI-Assisted Medical Documentation in a Multilingual Swiss Health Care System: Proof-of-Concept Study.JMIR AI · 2026Article
- [Focus: artificial intelligence in medicine-Legal aspects of using large language models in clinical practice].Innere Medizin (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Review
- Benefits, barriers, and facilitators of using speech recognition technology in nursing documentation and reporting: A cross-sectional study.Health science reports · 2023Article
- Linguistic and ontological challenges of multiple domains contributing to transformed health ecosystems.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- Interfacing With the Electronic Health Record (EHR): A Comparative Review of Modes of Documentation.Cureus · 2022Review
- Effects of a novel endoscopic reporting system with voice recognition on the endoscopic procedure time and report preparation time: propensity score matching analysis.Journal of gastroenterology · 2022Article
- Complete and Resilient Documentation for Operational Medical Environments Leveraging Mobile Hands-free Technology in a Systems Approach: Experimental Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2021Article
- Situation of labour room documentation at secondary level public health facilities of Cuttack district, Odisha, India - A SWOT analysis.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2020Article
- Analysis of Digital Documentation Speed and Sequence Using Digital Paper and Pen Technology During the Refugee Crisis in Europe: Content Analysis.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2019Article
- Asynchronous Speech Recognition Affects Physician Editing of Notes.Applied clinical informatics · 2018Article
- Electronic Health Record Interactions through Voice: A Review.Applied clinical informatics · 2018Review
- Provider Adoption of Speech Recognition and its Impact on Satisfaction, Documentation Quality, Efficiency, and Cost in an Inpatient EHR.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2018Article
- Optimizing whisper for Korean telemedicine: Fine-tuning domain-specific ASR for clinical telephone transcription.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClinical documentation has undergone a change due to the usage of electronic health records. The core element is to capture clinical findings and document therapy electronically. Health care personnel spend a significant portion of their time on the computer. Alternatives to self-typing, such as speech recognition, are currently believed to increase documentation efficiency and quality, as well as satisfaction of health professionals while accomplishing clinical documentation, but few studies in this area have been published to date.
objectiveThis study describes the effects of using a Web-based medical speech recognition system for clinical documentation in a university hospital on (1) documentation speed, (2) document length, and (3) physician satisfaction.
methodsReports of 28 physicians were randomized to be created with (intervention) or without (control) the assistance of a Web-based system of medical automatic speech recognition (ASR) in the German language. The documentation was entered into a browser's text area and the time to complete the documentation including all necessary corrections, correction effort, number of characters, and mood of participant were stored in a database. The underlying time comprised text entering, text correction, and finalization of the documentation event. Participants self-assessed their moods on a scale of 1-3 (1=good, 2=moderate, 3=bad). Statistical analysis was done using permutation tests.
resultsThe number of clinical reports eligible for further analysis stood at 1455. Out of 1455 reports, 718 (49.35%) were assisted by ASR and 737 (50.65%) were not assisted by ASR. Average documentation speed without ASR was 173 (SD 101) characters per minute, while it was 217 (SD 120) characters per minute using ASR. The overall increase in documentation speed through Web-based ASR assistance was 26% (P=.04). Participants documented an average of 356 (SD 388) characters per report when not assisted by ASR and 649 (SD 561) characters per report when assisted by ASR. Participants' average mood rating was 1.3 (SD 0.6) using ASR assistance compared to 1.6 (SD 0.7) without ASR assistance (P<.001).
conclusionsWe conclude that medical documentation with the assistance of Web-based speech recognition leads to an increase in documentation speed, document length, and participant mood when compared to self-typing. Speech recognition is a meaningful and effective tool for the clinical documentation process.
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.