ArticleSouthern medical journal2016
Health Information Exchange in the ED: What Do ED Clinicians Think?
Article in Southern medical journal, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Effects of Health Information Technology on Quality of Care in Emergency Departments: A Systematic Review.Health science reports · 2025Review
- Hospital's adoption of multiple methods of obtaining outside information and use of that information.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022Article
- The effect of My Health Record use in the emergency department on clinician-assessed patient care: results from a survey.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2022Article
- Impact of Provider Prior Use of HIE on System Complexity, Performance, Patient Care, Quality and System Concerns.Information systems frontiers : a journal of research and innovation · 2022Article
- Physicians' and pharmacists' use of My Health Record in the emergency department: results from a mixed-methods study.Health information science and systems · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesOur regional health information exchange (HIE), known as Carolina eHealth Alliance (CeHA)-HIE, serves all major hospital systems in our region and is accessible to emergency department (ED) clinicians in those systems. We wanted to understand reasons for low CeHA-HIE utilization and explore options for improving it.
methodsWe implemented a 24-item user survey among ED clinician users of CeHA-HIE to investigate their perceptions of system usability and functionality, the quality of the information available through CeHA-HIE, the value of clinician time spent using CeHA-HIE, the ease of use of CeHA-HIE, and approaches for improving CeHA-HIE.
resultsOf the 231 ED clinicians surveyed, 51 responded, and among those, 48 reported having used CeHA-HIE and completed the survey.
conclusionsResults show most ED clinicians believed that CeHA-HIE was easy to use and added value to their work, but they also desired better integration of information available from CeHA-HIE into their system's electronic medical record.
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.