ArticleZdravstveno varstvo2022
Analysis of Two Diverse Nursing Records Applications: Mixed Methods Approach.
Article in Zdravstveno varstvo, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Electronic Nursing Records: Importance for Nursing and Benefits of Implementation in Health Information Systems-A Scoping Review.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Poor adoption of electronic health records among healthcare workers can diminish their impact. Healthcare informatics solutions development should diligently acknowledge end-user needs. This study compares a user experience and perceived quality of the nursing process integration in two different applications for electronic documentation of the nursing care plan. Both applications were designed and tested in Slovenia. Methods: In the first phase, final year undergraduate nursing students were recruited (n=73) and randomly assigned into two groups. Each group used one of the applications for a duration of five hours. A survey among students was conducted. In the second phase, additional students were recruited (n=40) and invited to participate in qualitative analysis of the unfavourably rated application. Results: The modern, visually improved application was favourably rated by students in terms of all aspects of application usability. However, students reported a significant number of inadequacies regarding the nursing process methodology integration. On the contrary, the students using the poorly rated and visually outdated application reported no such concerns. Qualitative analysis of student reflections identified additional positive features of software design that were not detected in survey results analysis. Conclusion: This study showed that a user-centred approach can be used to compare diverse electronic solutions. Detected discrepancies in findings using qualitative and quantitative analysis show the importance of integrating diverse research approaches for adequate evaluation of software solutions. Furthermore, this study design promotes empowerment of healthcare workers to participate in the development and critical evaluations of software solutions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.