ArticleApplied clinical informatics2019
Challenges and Opportunities to Improve the Clinician Experience Reviewing Electronic Progress Notes.
Article in Applied clinical informatics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 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
20 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimizing generative artificial intelligence for clinical summarization: a blinded comparison study of automated versus human care planning synopses.JAMIA open · 2026Article
- What do clinicians edit in ambient AI-drafted clinical documentation? A qualitative content analysis.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026Article
- Clinical sentiment analysis of ICU notes: a dataset and a comparison of lexicon and clinical language model methods.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Large language model evaluation and feedback of transcribed simulated physician-patient verbal interactions.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- Aspect-Oriented Summarization for Psychiatric Short-Term Readmission Prediction.Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · 2025Article
- Optimizing Documentation Integrity of Ophthalmic Diagnostic Test Interpretation through Electronic Health Record Clinical Decision Support.Applied clinical informatics · 2025Article
- Comparison of Multimodal Deep Learning Approaches for Predicting Clinical Deterioration in Ward Patients: Observational Cohort Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Observational
- Improving sepsis prediction in intensive care with SepsisAI: A clinical decision support system with a focus on minimizing false alarms.PLOS digital health · 2024Article
- Machine learning to predict notes for chart review in the oncology setting: a proof of concept strategy for improving clinician note-writing.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024Article
- Standardization of Emergency Department Clinical Note Templates: A Retrospective Analysis across an Integrated Health System.Applied clinical informatics · 2024Article
- Overview of the Problem List Summarization (ProbSum) 2023 Shared Task on Summarizing Patients' Active Diagnoses and Problems from Electronic Health Record Progress Notes.Proceedings of the conference. Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting · 2023Article
- Novel Note Templates to Enhance Signal and Reduce Noise in Medical Documentation: Prospective Improvement Study.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- DR.BENCH: Diagnostic Reasoning Benchmark for Clinical Natural Language Processing.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2023Article
- Summarizing Patients' Problems from Hospital Progress Notes Using Pre-trained Sequence-to-Sequence Models.Proceedings of COLING. International Conference on Computational Linguistics · 2022Article
- Hierarchical Annotation for Building A Suite of Clinical Natural Language Processing Tasks: Progress Note Understanding.LREC ... International Conference on Language Resources & Evaluation : [proceedings]. International Conference on Language Resources & Evaluation · 2022Article
- Evaluating Electronic Health Record Limitations and Time Expenditure in a German Medical Center.Applied clinical informatics · 2021Article
- Resident Physician Experience and Duration of Electronic Health Record Use.Applied clinical informatics · 2021Article
- Use, Impact, Weaknesses, and Advanced Features of Search Functions for Clinical Use in Electronic Health Records: A Scoping Review.Applied clinical informatics · 2021Article
- Building the evidence-base to reduce electronic health record-related clinician burden.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021Article
- Clinical Thinking via Electronic Note Templates: Who Benefits?Journal of general internal medicine · 2021Article
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
Abstract
backgroundHigh-quality clinical notes are essential to effective clinical communication. However, electronic clinical notes are often long, difficult to review, and contain information that is potentially extraneous or out of date. Additionally, many clinicians write electronic clinical notes using customized templates, resulting in notes with significant variability in structure. There is a need to understand better how clinicians review electronic notes and how note structure variability may impact clinicians' note-reviewing experiences.
objectiveThis article aims to understand how physicians review electronic clinical notes and what impact section order has on note-reviewing patterns. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe conducted an experiment utilizing an electronic health record (EHR) system prototype containing four anonymized patient cases, each composed of nine progress notes that were presented with note sections organized in different orders to different subjects (i.e., Subjective, Objective, Assessment, and Plan, Assessment, Plan, Subjective, and Objective, Subjective, Assessment, Objective, and Plan, and Mixed). Participants, who were mid-level residents and fellows, reviewed the cases and provided a brief summary after reviewing each case. Time-related data were collected and analyzed using descriptive statistics. Surveys were administered and interviews regarding experiences reviewing notes were collected and analyzed qualitatively.
resultsQualitatively, participants reported challenges related to reviewing electronic clinical notes. Experimentally, time spent reviewing notes varied based on the note section organization. Consistency in note section organization improved performance (e.g., less scrolling and searching) compared with Mixed section organization when reviewing progress notes. DISCUSSION: Clinicians face significant challenges reviewing electronic clinical notes. Our findings support minimizing extraneous information in notes, removing information that can be found in other parts of the EHR, and standardizing the display and order of note sections to improve clinicians' note review experience.
conclusionOur findings support the need to improve EHR note design and presentation to support optimal note review patterns for clinicians.
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.