ArticleJAMIA open2019
Factors impacting physician use of information charted by others.
Article in JAMIA open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- EHR Interoperability Experiences Reported by Family Physicians.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Automating Electronic Health Record Data Quality Assessment.Journal of medical systems · 2023Review
- Near Real Time EHR Data Utilization in a Clinical Study.Studies in health technology and informatics · 2020Article
- Analysis of Anesthesia Screens for Rule-Based Data Quality Assessment Opportunities.Studies in health technology and informatics · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo identify factors impacting physician use of information charted by others. MATERIALS AND
methodsA 4-round Delphi process was conducted with physicians and non-physicians publishing in the healthcare data quality literature to identify and characterize factors impacting physician use of information charted by others (other people or devices), either within or external to their organization. Factors with high average importance and reliability were categorized according to similarity of topic.
resultsThirty-nine factors were ultimately identified as impacting physician use of information charted by others. Five categories of factors included aspects of: the information source, the information itself, the information user, the information system, and aspects of healthcare as an institution. In addition, 4 themes were identified: (1) value of narrative text in providing context, (2) importance of mental models and personal heuristics in deciding whether, and how to use information, (3) loss of confidence in, and decreased use of information due to errors encountered, and (4) existence of a trust hierarchy potentially influencing information use. DISCUSSION: Five similarly focused studies have recently probed clinician willingness to use information in decision-making. Our results mostly confirmed factors identified by prior studies, and uniquely identified aspects of the information user as important.
conclusionAccording to the participants in this study, information quality is prominent among factors impacting physician use of information charted by others. Based on this and similar studies, it appears that despite concerns about information quality, physicians use information charted by others.
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.