Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30424758›Full record

SynthesisBMC medical informatics and decision making2018

Primary care physicians' attitudes to the adoption of electronic medical records: a systematic review and evidence synthesis using the clinical adoption framework.

Amy O'Donnell, Eileen Kaner, Caroline Shaw, Catherine Haighton

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
23.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

50 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 114 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Amy O'DonnellInstitute of Health & Society, Newcastle University, Baddiley-Clark Building, Richardson Road, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4AX, UK. amy.odonnell@newcastle.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-4071-9434
Eileen KanerInstitute of Health & Society, Newcastle University, Baddiley-Clark Building, Richardson Road, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4AX, UK.
Caroline ShawInstitute of Health & Society, Newcastle University, Baddiley-Clark Building, Richardson Road, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4AX, UK.
Catherine HaightonDepartment of Social Work, Education and Community Wellbeing, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE7 7XA, UK.
Newcastle University · GBNorthumbria University · GB

Funding

British Heart FoundationCancer Research UKDepartment of HealthMedical Research Council MR/K02325X/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecent decades have seen rapid growth in the implementation of Electronic Medical Records (EMRs) in healthcare settings in both developed regions as well as low and middle income countries. Yet despite substantial investment, the implementation of EMRs in some primary care systems has lagged behind other settings, with piecemeal adoption of EMR functionality by primary care physicians (PCPs) themselves. We aimed to review and synthesise international literature on the attitudes of PCPs to EMR adoption using the Clinical Adoption (CA) Framework.

methodsMEDLINE, PsycINFO, and EMBASE were searched from 1st January 1996 to 1st August 2017 for studies investigating PCP attitudes towards EMR adoption. Papers were screened by two independent reviewers, and eligible studies selected for further assessment. Findings were categorised against the CA Framework and the quality of studies assessed against one of three appropriate tools.

resultsOut of 2263 potential articles, 33 were included, based in North and South America, Europe, Middle East and Hong Kong. Concerns about the accessibility, reliability and EMR utility exerted an adverse influence on PCPs' attitudes to adoption. However many were positive about their potential to improve clinical productivity, patient safety and care quality. Younger, computer-literate PCPs, based in large/multi-group practices, were more likely to be positively inclined to EMR use than older physicians, less-skilled in technology use, based in solo practices. Adequate training, policies and procedures favourably impacted on PCPs' views on EMR implementation. Financial factors were common system level influencers shaping EMR adoption, from start-up costs to the resources required by ongoing use.

conclusionsBy using the CA Framework to synthesise the evidence, we identified a linked series of factors influencing PCPs attitudes to EMR adoption. Findings underline the need to involve end-users in future implementation programmes from the outset, to avoid the development of an EMR which is neither feasible nor acceptable for use in practice.

trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42016038790 .

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelAttitude to ComputersElectronic Health RecordsPhysicians, Primary CarePrimary Health CareHumansClinical adoption frameworkElectronic health recordsGeneral practitionersPrimary health care

Identifiers

PMID30424758
PMCPMC6234586
OpenAlexW2901657323

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.