ReviewJMIR medical informatics2019
Interoperable Electronic Health Records and Health Information Exchanges: Systematic Review.
Review in JMIR medical informatics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Impact of Electronic Health Record Interoperability on Safety and Quality of Care in High-Income Countries: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Pooled it
- Article
- Integration of electronic health records with automated compounding for parenteral nutrition: A narrative review.JPEN. Journal of parenteral and enteral nutrition · 2026Review
- Shifts in primary care utilization patterns following digital health implementation: an operational evaluation of the 2023-2024 Hajj mass gatherings.Frontiers in public health · 2026Observational
- PICO-based assessment and categorization of evidence for digital health interventions: an inductive framework development.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Review
- Article
- Article
- User Requirements and Conceptual Design for an Electronic Data Platform for Interhospital Transfer Between Acute Care Hospitals: User-Centered Design Study.JMIR human factors · 2025Article
- The Danish Drowning Cohort: Utstein-style data from fatal and non-fatal drowning incidents in Denmark.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Article
- Article
- Standardizing Corneal Transplantation Records Using openEHR: Case Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2024Article
- A unified component-based data-driven framework to support interoperability in the healthcare systems.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Older adults experience of transition to the community from the emergency department: a qualitative evidence synthesis.BMC geriatrics · 2024Article
- Changes in Health Information Exchange Use Behavior After Introduction of a Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) Application.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2024Article
- A Unique Use of Regional Information Exchange by a Statewide Health System Serving Refugees: "Operation Allies Welcome".Applied clinical informatics · 2023Article
- The data quality and applicability of a Danish prehospital electronic health record: A mixed-methods study.PloS one · 2023Article
- Trends and Factors Associated with Suicide Deaths in Older Adults in Ontario, Canada.Canadian geriatrics journal : CGJ · 2022Article
- Article
- Practice and market factors associated with provider volume of health information exchange.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021Article
- Effects of Electronic Health Record Implementation and Barriers to Adoption and Use: A Scoping Review and Qualitative Analysis of the Content.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAs the availability of interoperable electronic health records (iEHRs) or health information exchanges (HIEs) continues to increase, there is greater need and opportunity to assess the current evidence base on what works and what does not regarding the adoption, use, and impact of iEHRs.
objectiveThe purpose of this project is to assess the international evidence base on the adoption, use, and impact of iEHRs.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review, searching multiple databases-MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL)-with supplemental searches conducted in Google Scholar and grey literature sources (ie, Google, Grey Literature Report, and OpenGrey). All searches were conducted in January and February 2017. Articles were eligible for inclusion if they were published in English, were published from 2006 to 2017, and were either an original research study or a literature review. In order to be included, articles needed to focus on iEHRs and HIEs across multiple health care settings, as well as on the impact and effectiveness of iEHR adoption and use.
resultsWe included 130 articles in the synthesis (113 primary studies, 86.9%; 17 reviews, 13.1%), with the majority focused on the United States (88/130, 67.7%). The primary studies focused on a wide range of health care settings; the three most prevalent settings studied included acute care (59/113, 52.2%), primary care (44/113, 38.9%), and emergency departments (34/113, 30.1%). We identified 29 distinct measurement items in the 113 primary studies that were linked to 522 specific measurement outcomes. Productivity and quality were the two evaluation dimensions that received the most attention, accounting for 14 of 29 (48%) measurement items and 306 of 522 (58.6%) measurement outcomes identified. Overall, the majority of the 522 measurement outcomes were positive (298/522, 57.1%). We also identified 17 reviews on iEHR use and impact, 6 (35%) that focused on barriers and facilitators to adoption and implementation and 11 (65%) that focused on benefits and impacts, with the more recent reviews finding little generalizable evidence of benefit and impact.
conclusionsThis review captures the status of an evolving and active field focused on the use and impact of iEHRs. While the overall findings suggest many positive impacts, the quality of the primary studies were not evaluated systematically. When broken down by specific measurement item, the results directed attention both to measurement outcomes that were consistently positive and others that were mostly negative or equivocal.
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.