Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32585689›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2020

Reconsidering hospital EHR adoption at the dawn of HITECH: implications of the reported 9% adoption of a "basic" EHR.

Jordan Everson, Joshua C Rubin, Charles P Friedman

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. New indices to track interoperability among US hospitals.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Celebrating G. Octo Barnett, MD.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Jordan EversonDepartment of Health Policy and Department of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.
Joshua C RubinDepartment of Learning Health Sciences, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Charles P FriedmanDepartment of Learning Health Sciences, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.

Funding

Learning Health System Scholar Program at VanderbiltK12HS026395 · AHRQ · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI ROTHMAN, RUSSELL L., ROUMIE, CHRISTIANNE L. · 2018 to 2022
$2.7M
AHRQ HHS K12 HS026395
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveIn 2009, a prominent national report stated that 9% of US hospitals had adopted a "basic" electronic health record (EHR) system. This statistic was widely cited and became a memetic anchor point for EHR adoption at the dawn of HITECH. However, its calculation relies on specific treatment of the data; alternative approaches may have led to a different sense of US hospitals' EHR adoption and different subsequent public policy. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe reanalyzed the 2008 American Heart Association Information Technology supplement and complementary sources to produce a range of estimates of EHR adoption. Estimates included the mean and median number of EHR functionalities adopted, figures derived from an item response theory-based approach, and alternative estimates from the published literature. We then plotted an alternative definition of national progress toward hospital EHR adoption from 2008 to 2018.

resultsBy 2008, 73% of hospitals had begun the transition to an EHR, and the majority of hospitals had adopted at least 6 of the 10 functionalities of a basic system. In the aggregate, national progress toward basic EHR adoption was 58% complete, and, when accounting for measurement error, we estimate that 30% of hospitals may have adopted a basic EHR. DISCUSSION: The approach used to develop the 9% figure resulted in an estimate at the extreme lower bound of what could be derived from the available data and likely did not reflect hospitals' overall progress in EHR adoption.

conclusionThe memetic 9% figure shaped nationwide thinking and policy making about EHR adoption; alternative representations of the data may have led to different policy.

Indexed as

American Recovery and Reinvestment ActDiffusion of InnovationElectronic Health RecordsHealth PolicyHospital AdministrationMedical Records Systems, ComputerizedUnited StatesAmerican Recovery and Reinvestment Act, hospitals, adoption, validity and reliabilityelectronic health records

Identifiers

PMID32585689
PMCPMC7481034

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.