Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30951160›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2019

Association of the Usability of Electronic Health Records With Cognitive Workload and Performance Levels Among Physicians.

Lukasz M Mazur, Prithima R Mosaly, Carlton Moore, Lawrence Marks

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 76 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
76citing papers in PubMed, 6 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.

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

76 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Communicating blood test results in primary care: a mixed-methods systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

16 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Lukasz M MazurSchool of Information and Library Science, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill.
Prithima R MosalySchool of Information and Library Science, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill.
Carlton MooreSchool of Information and Library Science, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill.
Lawrence MarksDivision of Healthcare Engineering, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill.

Funding

Enhancing Providers' Ability to Follow-up on Abnormal Test ResultsR21HS024062 · AHRQ · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI MAZUR, LUKASZ · 2015 to 2015
$298k
AHRQ HHS R21 HS024062
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Current electronic health record (EHR) user interfaces are suboptimally designed and may be associated with excess cognitive workload and poor performance. Objective: To assess the association between the usability of an EHR system for the management of abnormal test results and physicians' cognitive workload and performance levels. Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement study was conducted in a simulated EHR environment. From April 1, 2016, to December 23, 2016, residents and fellows from a large academic institution were enrolled and allocated to use either a baseline EHR (n = 20) or an enhanced EHR (n = 18). Data analyses were conducted from January 9, 2017, to March 30, 2018. Interventions: The EHR with enhanced usability segregated in a dedicated folder previously identified critical test results for patients who did not appear for a scheduled follow-up evaluation and provided policy-based decision support instructions for next steps. The baseline EHR displayed all patients with abnormal or critical test results in a general folder and provided no decision support instructions for next steps. Main Outcomes and Measures: Cognitive workload was quantified subjectively using NASA-Task Load Index and physiologically using blink rates. Performance was quantified according to the percentage of appropriately managed abnormal test results. Results: Of the 38 participants, 25 (66%) were female. The 20 participants allocated to the baseline EHR compared with the 18 allocated to the enhanced EHR demonstrated statistically significantly higher cognitive workload as quantified by blink rate (mean [SD] blinks per minute, 16 [9] vs 24 [7]; blink rate, -8 [95% CI, -13 to -2]; P = .01). The baseline group showed statistically significantly poorer performance compared with the enhanced group who appropriately managed 16% more abnormal test results (mean [SD] performance, 68% [19%] vs 98% [18%]; performance rate, -30% [95% CI, -40% to -20%]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Relatively basic usability enhancements to the EHR system appear to be associated with better physician cognitive workload and performance; this finding suggests that next-generation systems should strip away non-value-added EHR interactions, which may help physicians eliminate the need to develop their own suboptimal workflows.

Indexed as

CognitionElectronic Health RecordsFemaleHealth Information SystemsHumansMalePhysiciansProspective StudiesQuality ImprovementUser-Computer InterfaceWorkloadWork Performance

Identifiers

PMID30951160
PMCPMC6450327

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.