Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31386576›Full record

ArticleJournal of athletic training2019

Athletic Trainers' Practice Patterns Regarding Medical Documentation.

Lindsey E Eberman, Elizabeth R Neil, Sara L Nottingham, Tricia M Kasamatsu, Cailee E Welch Bacon

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of athletic training, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
8.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Lindsey E EbermanNeuromechanics, Interventions, and Continuing Education Research (NICER) Laboratory, Indiana State University, Terre Haute.
Elizabeth R NeilNeuromechanics, Interventions, and Continuing Education Research (NICER) Laboratory, Indiana State University, Terre Haute.
Sara L NottinghamDepartment of Health, Exercise and Sports Sciences, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.
Tricia M KasamatsuDepartment of Kinesiology, California State University, Fullerton.
Cailee E Welch BaconDepartment of Interdisciplinary Health Sciences, A.T. Still University, Mesa, AZ.
Indiana State University · USA.T. Still University · USCalifornia State University, Fullerton · USUniversity of New Mexico · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

contextMedical documentation is a required component of patient care in all health care professions.

objectiveTo evaluate athletic trainers' perceived behaviors toward, barriers to, and confidence in their medical documentation.

designCross-sectional study.

settingWeb-based survey. PATIENTS OR OTHER

participantsWe purchased a list of randomly selected e-mails from the National Athletic Trainers' Association. Of the 9578 participants, 1150 accessed our questionnaire (12.0% access rate), 1053 completed at least 1 portion, and 904 completed the questionnaire in its entirety (85.8% completion rate). Of the participants, 60.1% (n = 569/947) were female, 66.6% (n = 632/949) held a master's degree, 39.3% (n = 414/1053) worked in a collegiate or university setting, and 36.1% (n = 381/1053) worked in a secondary school setting. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): We used a 31-item questionnaire with demographics (12 items), medical documentation behaviors (16 items), barriers (2 items), and perceptions (1 multipart item) sections. The questionnaire explored athletic trainers' behaviors as well as confidence in, comfort with, and concerns about their documentation practices (Cronbach α = 0.887). We used descriptive statistics to identify characteristics of central tendency (mean, standard deviation, mode, frequency).

resultsParticipants always (45.7%, n = 478/1046) or very frequently (39.0%, n = 408/1046) used a double documentation system consisting of electronic and paper records (50.4%, n = 523/1038). They most often documented to provide legal protection (86.8%, n = 914/1053), because it is a legal obligation (79.1%, n = 833/1053), or to track patient progress (83.9%, n = 883/1053). The most frequently cited barriers to medical documentation were time (76.5%, n = 806/1053), managing too many patients (51.9%, n = 547/1053), technological concerns (17.2%, n = 181/1053), and software limitations (17.2%, n = 181/1053). Respondents believed they were competent, comfortable, and confident in their documentation practices.

conclusionsWe were able to evaluate the generalizability of previous research while adding to the understanding of the behaviors toward, barriers to, and perceptions about medical documentation. We confirmed that time and patient load affected the ability to perform high-quality medical documentation.

Indexed as

DocumentationPatient CareProfessional PracticeSportsAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleProfessional CompetenceSchoolsSurveys and QuestionnairesUniversitiesdocumentation barriersmedical documentation behaviorsmedical record keeping

Identifiers

PMID31386576
PMCPMC6709754
OpenAlexW2966191390

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.