Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31688354›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical neurophysiology : official publication of the American Electroencephalographic Society2020

Acceptability of Standardized EEG Reporting in an Electronic Health Record.

Stephanie Witzman, Shavonne L Massey, Sudha Kessler, Ernesto Gonzalez-Giraldo, Sara E Fridinger, Lila Worden, Naomi Lewin, Dennis Dlugos, Susan Melamed, Mark Fitzgerald and 9 more

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical neurophysiology : official publication of the American Electroencephalographic Society, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Late-Onset Findings During Extended EEG Monitoring Are Rare in Critically Ill Children.Journal of clinical neurophysiology : official publication of the American Electroencephalographic Society · 2025
    Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

19 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Stephanie WitzmanDepartment of Information Services, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
Shavonne L MasseyDepartment of Pediatrics (Division of Neurology), Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and University of Pennsylvania Perelman, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
Sudha KesslerDepartment of Pediatrics (Division of Neurology), Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and University of Pennsylvania Perelman, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
Ernesto Gonzalez-GiraldoDepartment of Pediatrics (Division of Neurology), Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and University of Pennsylvania Perelman, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
Sara E FridingerDepartment of Pediatrics (Division of Neurology), Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and University of Pennsylvania Perelman, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
Lila WordenDepartment of Pediatrics (Division of Neurology), Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and University of Pennsylvania Perelman, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
Naomi LewinDepartment of Pediatrics (Division of Neurology), Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and University of Pennsylvania Perelman, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
Dennis DlugosDepartment of Pediatrics (Division of Neurology), Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and University of Pennsylvania Perelman, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
Susan MelamedDepartment of Pediatrics (Division of Neurology), Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and University of Pennsylvania Perelman, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
Mark FitzgeraldDepartment of Pediatrics (Division of Neurology), Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and University of Pennsylvania Perelman, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
France W FungDepartment of Pediatrics (Division of Neurology), Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and University of Pennsylvania Perelman, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
Marissa FerruziDepartment of Neurodiagnostics, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.; and.
Nicole McNameeDepartment of Neurodiagnostics, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.; and.
Denise LaFalceDepartment of Neurodiagnostics, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.; and.
Maureen DonnellyDepartment of Neurodiagnostics, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.; and.
Amber HaywoodDepartment of Neurodiagnostics, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.; and.
Linda Allen-NapoliDepartment of Neurodiagnostics, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.; and.
Brenda BanwellDepartment of Pediatrics (Division of Neurology), Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and University of Pennsylvania Perelman, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
Nicholas S AbendDepartment of Pediatrics (Division of Neurology), Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and University of Pennsylvania Perelman, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
Children's Hospital of Philadelphia · USUniversity of Pennsylvania · US

Funding

Electrographic seizure management and neurobehavioral outcomes in critically ill children.K02NS096058 · NINDS · CHILDREN'S HOSP OF PHILADELPHIA · PI ABEND, NICHOLAS SCOTT · 2017 to 2019
$579k
NINDS NIH HHS K02 NS096058
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

rationaleImplementation of electronic health records may improve the quality, accuracy, timeliness, and availability of documentation. Thus, our institution developed a system that integrated EEG ordering, scheduling, standardized reporting, and billing. Given the importance of user perceptions for successful implementation, we performed a quality improvement study to evaluate electroencephalographer satisfaction with the new EEG report system.

methodsWe implemented an EEG report system that was integrated in an electronic health record. In this single-center quality improvement study, we surveyed electroencephalographers regarding overall acceptability, report standardization, workflow efficiency, documentation quality, and fellow education using a 0 to 5 scale (with 5 denoting best).

resultsEighteen electroencephalographers responded to the survey. The median score for recommending the overall system to a colleague was 5 (range 3-5), which indicated good overall satisfaction and acceptance of the system. The median scores for report standardization (4; 3-5) and workflow efficiency (4.5; 3-5) indicated that respondents perceived the system as useful and easy to use for documentation tasks. The median scores for quality of documentation (4.5; 1-5) and fellow education (4; 1-5) indicated that although most respondents believed the system provided good quality reports and helped with fellow education, a small number of respondents had substantially different views (ratings of 1).

conclusionsOverall electroencephalographer satisfaction with the new EEG report system was high, as were the scores for perceived usefulness (assessed as standardization, documentation quality, and education) and ease of use (assessed as workflow efficiency). Future study is needed to determine whether implementation yields useful data for clinical research and quality improvement studies or improves EEG report standardization.

Indexed as

DocumentationElectroencephalographyElectronic Health RecordsHumansPhysiciansSurveys and QuestionnairesWorkflow

Identifiers

PMID31688354
PMCPMC7186141
OpenAlexW2985345884

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.