Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33291615›Full record

ArticleLife (Basel, Switzerland)2020

Effects of Electronic Health Record Implementation and Barriers to Adoption and Use: A Scoping Review and Qualitative Analysis of the Content.

Chen Hsi Tsai, Aboozar Eghdam, Nadia Davoody, Graham Wright, Stephen Flowerday, Sabine Koch

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 128 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
128citing papers in PubMed, 7 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

128 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. The Global Airways Unit: A Multidisciplinary Strategy for Early Diagnosis and Comorbidity Detection.World journal of otorhinolaryngology - head and neck surgery · 2026
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

68 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors.

Chen Hsi TsaiHealth Informatics Centre, Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, Sweden.
Aboozar EghdamHealth Informatics Centre, Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-8690-8594
Nadia DavoodyHealth Informatics Centre, Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, Sweden.
Graham WrightDepartment of Information Systems, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 6140, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-8642-7405
Stephen FlowerdayDepartment of Information Systems, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 6140, South Africa.
Sabine KochHealth Informatics Centre, Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-7144-8740

Funding

Forskningsrådet om Hälsa, Arbetsliv och Välfärd 2016-07324South African Medical Research Council 2016-07324
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite the great advances in the field of electronic health records (EHRs) over the past 25 years, implementation and adoption challenges persist, and the benefits realized remain below expectations. This scoping review aimed to present current knowledge about the effects of EHR implementation and the barriers to EHR adoption and use. A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, IEEE Xplore Digital Library and ACM Digital Library for studies published between January 2005 and May 2020. In total, 7641 studies were identified of which 142 met the criteria and attained the consensus of all researchers on inclusion. Most studies (n = 91) were published between 2017 and 2019 and 81 studies had the United States as the country of origin. Both positive and negative effects of EHR implementation were identified, relating to clinical work, data and information, patient care and economic impact. Resource constraints, poor/insufficient training and technical/educational support for users, as well as poor literacy and skills in technology were the identified barriers to adoption and use that occurred frequently. Although this review did not conduct a quality analysis of the included papers, the lack of uniformity in the use of EHR definitions and detailed contextual information concerning the study settings could be observed.

Indexed as

adoptionelectronic health recordimplementationpersonal health recordscoping review

Identifiers

PMID33291615
PMCPMC7761950

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.