Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34878997›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2021

The Effect of Automated Mammogram Orders Paired With Electronic Invitations to Self-schedule on Mammogram Scheduling Outcomes: Observational Cohort Comparison.

Frederick North, Elissa M Nelson, Rebecca J Buss, Rebecca J Majerus, Matthew C Thompson, Brian A Crum

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Patient Perspectives on Delayed Specialty Follow-Up After a Primary Care Visit.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM · 2025
    Article
  4. Using Self-Scheduling to Improve Screening Mammography Completion Rates.Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR · 2025
    Article
  5. Observational
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. The effect of outpatient web-based online scheduling versus traditional staff scheduling systems on progression to surgery and no-show rates.Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences · 2023
    Article
  12. Automated patient self-scheduling: case study.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Frederick NorthDivision of Community Internal Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3696-4595
Elissa M NelsonEnterprise Office of Access Management, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4516-379X
Rebecca J BussEnterprise Office of Access Management, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4583-4987
Rebecca J MajerusEnterprise Office of Access Management, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2960-8496
Matthew C ThompsonEnterprise Office of Access Management, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0282-9181
Brian A CrumDepartment of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2624-0649
Mayo Clinic in Florida · USMayo Clinic in Arizona · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundScreening mammography is recommended for the early detection of breast cancer. The processes for ordering screening mammography often rely on a health care provider order and a scheduler to arrange the time and location of breast imaging. Self-scheduling after automated ordering of screening mammograms may offer a more efficient and convenient way to schedule screening mammograms.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to determine the use, outcomes, and efficiency of an automated mammogram ordering and invitation process paired with self-scheduling.

methodsWe examined appointment data from 12 months of scheduled mammogram appointments, starting in September 2019 when a web and mobile app self-scheduling process for screening mammograms was made available for the Mayo Clinic primary care practice. Patients registered to the Mayo Clinic Patient Online Services could view the schedules and book their mammogram appointment via the web or a mobile app. Self-scheduling required no telephone calls or staff appointment schedulers. We examined uptake (count and percentage of patients utilizing self-scheduling), number of appointment actions taken by self-schedulers and by those using staff schedulers, no-show outcomes, scheduling efficiency, and weekend and after-hours use of self-scheduling.

resultsFor patients who were registered to patient online services and had screening mammogram appointment activity, 15.3% (14,387/93,901) used the web or mobile app to do either some mammogram self-scheduling or self-cancelling appointment actions. Approximately 24.4% (3285/13,454) of self-scheduling occurred after normal business hours/on weekends. Approximately 9.3% (8736/93,901) of the patients used self-scheduling/cancelling exclusively. For self-scheduled mammograms, there were 5.7% (536/9433) no-shows compared to 4.6% (3590/77,531) no-shows in staff-scheduled mammograms (unadjusted odds ratio 1.24, 95% CI 1.13-1.36; P<.001). The odds ratio of no-shows for self-scheduled mammograms to staff-scheduled mammograms decreased to 1.12 (95% CI 1.02-1.23; P=.02) when adjusted for age, race, and ethnicity. On average, since there were only 0.197 staff-scheduler actions for each finalized self-scheduled appointment, staff schedulers were rarely used to redo or "clean up" self-scheduled appointments. Exclusively self-scheduled appointments were significantly more efficient than staff-scheduled appointments. Self-schedulers experienced a single appointment step process (one and done) for 93.5% (7553/8079) of their finalized appointments; only 74.5% (52,804/70,839) of staff-scheduled finalized appointments had a similar one-step appointment process (P<.001). For staff-scheduled appointments, 25.5% (18,035/70,839) of the finalized appointments took multiple appointment steps. For finalized appointments that were exclusively self-scheduled, only 6.5% (526/8079) took multiple appointment steps. The staff-scheduled to self-scheduled odds ratio of taking multiple steps for a finalized screening mammogram appointment was 4.9 (95% CI 4.48-5.37; P<.001).

conclusionsScreening mammograms can be efficiently self-scheduled but may be associated with a slight increase in no-shows. Self-scheduling can decrease staff scheduler work and can be convenient for patients who want to manage their appointment scheduling activity after business hours or on weekends.

Indexed as

appcancercomputer software applicationdiagnosticEHRelectronic health recordmammogrammobile applicationsoffice visitoutpatient carepatient appointmentpreventive health serviceschedulescreeningself-schedulesoftware tool

Identifiers

PMID34878997
PMCPMC8693199
OpenAlexW4200439895

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.