Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27830226›Full record

ArticleYearbook of medical informatics2016

New Unintended Adverse Consequences of Electronic Health Records.

D F Sittig, A Wright, J Ash, H Singh

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Yearbook of medical informatics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01710293 (Automated Point-of-Care Surveillance of Outpatient Delays in Cancer Diagnosis), which is not on this map. Cited by 39 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 2 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.

NCT01710293 nawithdrawnnot on this mapstarted 2017, after this paper: background citation

Automated Point-of-Care Surveillance of Outpatient Delays in Cancer Diagnosis

TypeinterventionalSponsorVA Office of Research and DevelopmentRan2017 to 2017Enrolled0ConditionsLung Cancer, Bladder Cancer, Colorectal Cancer, Hepatocellular CarcinomaArmsCommunication of Patients Lost to Follow-up to Providers
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Tensions in large-scale electronic health record implementations: insights from a meta-synthesis.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Medical and nursing clinician perspectives on the usability of the hospital electronic medical record: A qualitative analysis.Health information management : journal of the Health Information Management Association of Australia · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

D F SittigDean F. Sittig, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, School of Biomedical Informatics, and UT-Memorial Hermann Center for Health Care Quality, and Safety, Houston, Texas, USA, E-mail: Dean.F.Sittig@uth.tmc.edu.
A Wright
J Ash
H Singh

Funding

Decision Making and Clinical Work of Test Result Follow-up in Health IT SettingsR01HS022087 · AHRQ · BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE · PI SINGH, HARDEEP · 2013 to 2016
$2.0M
AHRQ HHS R01 HS022087
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although the health information technology industry has made considerable progress in the design, development, implementation, and use of electronic health records (EHRs), the lofty expectations of the early pioneers have not been met. In 2006, the Provider Order Entry Team at Oregon Health & Science University described a set of unintended adverse consequences (UACs), or unpredictable, emergent problems associated with computer-based provider order entry implementation, use, and maintenance. Many of these originally identified UACs have not been completely addressed or alleviated, some have evolved over time, and some new ones have emerged as EHRs became more widely available. The rapid increase in the adoption of EHRs, coupled with the changes in the types and attitudes of clinical users, has led to several new UACs, specifically: complete clinical information unavailable at the point of care; lack of innovations to improve system usability leading to frustrating user experiences; inadvertent disclosure of large amounts of patient-specific information; increased focus on computer-based quality measurement negatively affecting clinical workflows and patient-provider interactions; information overload from marginally useful computer-generated data; and a decline in the development and use of internally-developed EHRs. While each of these new UACs poses significant challenges to EHR developers and users alike, they also offer many opportunities. The challenge for clinical informatics researchers is to continue to refine our current systems while exploring new methods of overcoming these challenges and developing innovations to improve EHR interoperability, usability, security, functionality, clinical quality measurement, and information summarization and display.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsDisclosureEfficiency, OrganizationalHumansMedical Order Entry SystemsUser-Computer InterfaceWorkflowconfidentialitydata displayElectronic Health Records (EHRs)medical informaticsquality indicatorsusability

Identifiers

PMID27830226
PMCPMC5171566

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.