Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32758220›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2020

Investigating the satisfaction level of physicians in regards to implementing medical Picture Archiving and Communication System (PACS).

Reza Abbasi, Monireh Sadeqi Jabali, Reza Khajouei, Hamidreza Tadayon

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Reza AbbasiStudent Research Committee, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran.
Monireh Sadeqi JabaliResearch Centre for Health Information Management, Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, Iran.
Reza KhajoueiMedical Informatics Research Center, Institute for Futures Studies in Health, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran.
Hamidreza TadayonResearch Centre for Health Information Management, Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, Iran. tadayonh1@nums.ac.ir.ORCID 0000-0003-0888-1108
Kerman University of Medical Sciences · IRKashan University of Medical Sciences · IRUniversity of Neyshabur · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUser satisfaction with PACS is considered as one of the important criteria for assessing success in using PACS. The objective of this study was to determine the level of user satisfaction with PACS and to compare its functional features with traditional film-based systems.

methodsThis study was conducted in 2017. Residents at three large university hospitals in Kerman filled-out a self-administered questionnaire consisting of three parts: demographic information of participants, user satisfaction with PACS, comparing features of the two digital and traditional imaging systems. The validity of this questionnaire was approved by five medical informatics, radiology, and health information management specialists and its reliability was confirmed by Cronbach's alpha (86%). Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and the Spearman, Mann Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis statistical tests.

resultsThe mean of the participants' ages was 31.4 (±4.4) years and 59% of the participants were females. The mean of physicians' satisfaction with PACS' had no significant relationship with their age (P = 0.611), experience of using PACS (P = 0.301), specialty (P = 0.093), and percent of interpretation of images with PACS (P = 0.762). It had a significant relationship with the participants' computer skills (P = 0.022).

conclusionsThe mean of physicians' satisfaction with PACS was at a moderate to a high level, yet there are still problems in the successful implementation of these systems and establishing interoperability between them. PACS has not fully met all the demands of physicians and has not achieved its predetermined objectives, such as all-access from different locations.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelPersonal SatisfactionRadiographic Image EnhancementRadiologyRadiology Information SystemsAdultAttitude to ComputersFemaleHospital Communication SystemsHumansMaleMiddle AgedPhysiciansReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesHealth information systemsPicture Archiving and Communication System (PACS)SatisfactionUsability

Identifiers

PMID32758220
PMCPMC7405331
OpenAlexW3047029788

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.