ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2017
What Clinical Information Is Valuable to Doctors Using Mobile Electronic Medical Records and When?
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Using electronic health record audit logs to study clinical activity: a systematic review of aims, measures, and methods.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2020Pooled it
- An exploratory study of electronic medical record implementation and recordkeeping culture: the case of hospitals in Indonesia.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Impact of encounters on patient app use: results of a tethered mobile personal health record usage pattern analysis.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- The Pros and Cons of Use of Handheld Electronic Devices During Ward Rounds and the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic.Advances in medical education and practice · 2023Article
- Health Professionals' Perspectives on Electronic Medical Record Infusion and Individual Performance: Model Development and Questionnaire Survey Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2021Article
- The Enterprise Imaging Value Proposition.Journal of digital imaging · 2020Review
- Evaluation of the Integrated Health Information System (IHIS) in Public Hospitals in Cyprus Utilizing the DIPSA Framework.Acta informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH · 2019Article
- A Mobile Phone App for Bedside Nursing Care: Design and Development Using an Adapted Software Development Life Cycle Model.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2019Article
- Variability in Doctors' Usage Paths of Mobile Electronic Health Records Across Specialties: Comprehensive Analysis of Log Data.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere has been a lack of understanding on what types of specific clinical information are most valuable for doctors to access through mobile-based electronic medical records (m-EMRs) and when they access such information. Furthermore, it has not been clearly discussed why the value of such information is high.
objectiveThe goal of this study was to investigate the types of clinical information that are most valuable to doctors to access through an m-EMR and when such information is accessed.
methodsSince 2010, an m-EMR has been used in a tertiary hospital in Seoul, South Korea. The usage logs of the m-EMR by doctors were gathered from March to December 2015. Descriptive analyses were conducted to explore the overall usage patterns of the m-EMR. To assess the value of the clinical information provided, the usage patterns of both the m-EMR and a hospital information system (HIS) were compared on an hourly basis. The peak usage times of the m-EMR were defined as continuous intervals having normalized usage values that are greater than 0.5. The usage logs were processed as an indicator representing specific clinical information using factor analysis. Random intercept logistic regression was used to explore the type of clinical information that is frequently accessed during the peak usage times.
resultsA total of 524,929 usage logs from 653 doctors (229 professors, 161 fellows, and 263 residents; mean age: 37.55 years; males: 415 [63.6%]) were analyzed. The highest average number of m-EMR usage logs (897) was by medical residents, whereas the lowest (292) was by surgical residents. The usage amount for three menus, namely inpatient list (47,096), lab results (38,508), and investigation list (25,336), accounted for 60.1% of the peak time usage. The HIS was used most frequently during regular hours (9:00 AM to 5:00 PM). The peak usage time of the m-EMR was early in the morning (6:00 AM to 10:00 AM), and the use of the m-EMR from early evening (5:00 PM) to midnight was higher than during regular business hours. Four factors representing the types of clinical information were extracted through factor analysis. Factors related to patient investigation status and patient conditions were associated with the peak usage times of the m-EMR (P<.01).
conclusionsAccess to information regarding patient investigation status and patient conditions is crucial for decision making during morning activities, including ward rounds. The m-EMRs allow doctors to maintain the continuity of their clinical information regardless of the time and location constraints. Thus, m-EMRs will best evolve in a manner that enhances the accessibility of clinical information helpful to the decision-making process under such constraints.
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.