ArticleJAMIA open2018
Providers' assessment of a novel interactive health information technology in a pediatric intensive care unit.
Article in JAMIA open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Effect of the Electronic Health Record on Interprofessional Practice: A Systematic Review.Applied clinical informatics · 2022Pooled it
- Areaalzheimer: development of a digital platform for caregivers based on the results of a needs analysis and mixed-methods pilot evaluation process.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
- Helping the Helpers - A research protocol for user-centered technology to aid caregiver management of medications for people with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias.Research in social & administrative pharmacy : RSAP · 2022Article
- A Web-Based Platform (CareVirtue) to Support Caregivers of People Living With Alzheimer Disease and Related Dementias: Mixed Methods Feasibility Study.JMIR aging · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo explore perceptions of critical care providers about a novel collaborative inpatient health information technology (HIT) in a pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) setting.
methodsThis cross-sectional, concurrent mixed methods study was conducted in the PICU of a large midwestern children's hospital. The technology, the Large Customizable Interactive Monitor (LCIM), is a flat panel touch screen monitor that displays validated patient information from the electronic health record. It does not require a password to login and is available in each patient's room for viewing and interactive use by physicians, nurses, and families. Quantitative data were collected via self-administered, standardized surveys, and qualitative data via in-person, semistructured interviews between January and April 2015. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and inductive thematic analysis.
resultsThe qualitative analysis showed positive impacts of the LCIM on providers' workflow, team interactions, and interactions with families. Providers reported concerns regarding perceived patient information overload and associated anxiety and burden for families. Sixty percent of providers thought that LCIM was useful for their jobs at different levels, and almost 70% of providers reported that LCIM improved information sharing and communication with families. The average overall satisfaction score was 3.4 on a 0 to 6 scale, between "a moderate amount" and "pretty much." DISCUSSION AND
conclusionThis study provides new insight into collaborative HIT in the inpatient pediatric setting and demonstrates that using such technology has the potential to improve providers' experiences with families and just-in-time access to EHR information in a format more easily shared with families.
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.