Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32698807›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2020

The influence of electronic health record use on collaboration among medical specialties.

Janita F J Vos, Albert Boonstra, Arjen Kooistra, Marc Seelen, Marjolein van Offenbeek

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 58 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
58citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
10.9field-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

58 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 112 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. A Bibliometric Analysis and Visualization of Decision Support Systems for Healthcare Referral Strategies.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Nurses' and Patients' Perspectives on Care Coordination Across Health Care and Social Services Sectors: A Qualitative Study.The Canadian journal of nursing research = Revue canadienne de recherche en sciences infirmieres · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Who will be our adult congenital heart disease patient tomorrow?European heart journal supplements : journal of the European Society of Cardiology · 2026
    Article
  19. Review
  20. 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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Janita F J VosFaculty of Economics and Business, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Albert BoonstraFaculty of Economics and Business, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. albert.boonstra@rug.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3565-0623
Arjen KooistraCerte, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Marc SeelenUniversity Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Marjolein van OffenbeekFaculty of Economics and Business, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
University of Groningen · NLCerte · NLUniversity Medical Center Groningen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOne of the main objectives of Electronic Health Records (EHRs) is to enhance collaboration among healthcare professionals. However, our knowledge of how EHRs actually affect collaborative practices is limited. This study examines how an EHR facilitates and constrains collaboration in five outpatient clinics.

methodsWe conducted an embedded case study at five outpatient clinics of a Dutch hospital that had implemented an organization-wide EHR. Data were collected through interviews with representatives of medical specialties, administration, nursing, and management. Documents were analyzed to contextualize these data. We examined the following collaborative affordances of EHRs: (1) portability, (2) co-located access, (3) shared overviews, (4) mutual awareness, (5) messaging, and (6) orchestrating.

resultsOur findings demonstrate how an EHR will both facilitate and constrain collaboration among specialties and disciplines. Affordances that were inscribed in the system for collaboration purposes were not fully actualized in the hospital because: (a) The EHR helps health professionals coordinate patient care on an informed basis at any time and in any place but only allows asynchronous patient record use. (b) The comprehensive patient file affords joint clinical decision-making based on shared data, but specialty- and discipline-specific user-interfaces constrain mutual understanding of that data. Moreover, not all relevant information can be easily shared across specialties and outside the hospital. (c) The reduced necessity for face-to-face communication saves time but is experienced as hindering collective responsibility for a smooth workflow. (d) The EHR affords registration at the source and registration of activities through orders, but the heightened administrative burden for physicians and the strict authorization rules on inputting data constrain the flexible, multidisciplinary collaboration. (e) While the EHR affords a complete overview, information overload occurs due to the parallel generation of individually owned notes and the high frequency of asynchronous communication through messages of varying clinical priority.

conclusionsFor the optimal actualization of EHRs' collaborative affordances in hospitals, coordinated use of these affordances by health professionals is a prerequisite. Such coordinated use requires organizational, technical, and behavioral adaptations. Suggestions for hospital-wide policies to enhance trust in both the EHR and in its coordinated use for effective collaboration are offered.

Indexed as

Interprofessional RelationsElectronic Health RecordsHumansMedicineCollaborationCollaborative affordancesElectronic health recordsUse

Identifiers

PMID32698807
PMCPMC7374868
OpenAlexW3043970791

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.