ArticleApplied clinical informatics2019
Provider Preference in Exam Room Layout Design and Computing.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinicians' use of Health Information Exchange technologies for medication reconciliation in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs: a qualitative analysis.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Veteran and Staff Experience from a Pilot Program of Health Care System-Distributed Wearable Devices and Data Sharing.Applied clinical informatics · 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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe introduction of the electronic health record (EHR) has had a significant impact on provider-patient interactions, particularly revolving around patient-centeredness. More research is needed to understand the provider perspective of this interaction.
objectivesOur objective was to obtain provider feedback on a new exam room design compared with the one already in use with respect to the computing layout, which included a wall-mounted monitor for ease of (re)-positioning. An additional objective was to understand elements of exam room design and computing that were highly valued.
methodsSemistructured interviews were conducted with 28 providers from several health care organizations. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed for analysis. We used an inductive coding approach to abstract recurrent themes from the data.
resultsOur analysis revealed several themes organized around exam room layout, exam room computing, and provider workflow. We report frequency of occurrence of the coded data for computer accessories, computing usefulness, computer mobility, documentation habits, form factor, layout preference, patient interaction, screen sharing, and work habits.
conclusionProviders in our study preferred exam room design to promote flexibility, mobility, and body orientation directed toward the patient. Providers also expressed the need for exam room design to support varying work habits and preferences, including whether to share the computer screen or not.
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.