ArticleJAMIA open2022
Development and pilot evaluation of an electronic health record usability and safety self-assessment tool.
Article in JAMIA open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Leveraging clinical decision support to improve depression screening and follow-up: insights from a quality improvement case study.Family medicine and community health · 2025Article
- Barriers and Facilitators of the Use of Computerized Critical Care Information Systems in the Intensive Care Unit: Qualitative Interview Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Assessing Medication CDS Usability: Pilot Results from 10 Outpatient Clinics.Applied clinical informatics · 2025Article
- Realizing the Full Potential of Clinical Decision Support: Translating Usability Testing into Routine Practice in Health Care Operations.Applied clinical informatics · 2024Article
- Inpatient EHR User Experience and Hospital EHR Safety Performance.JAMA network open · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: Poor electronic health record (EHR) usability contributes to clinician burnout and poses patent safety risks. Site-specific customization and configuration of EHRs require individual EHR system usability and safety testing which is resource intensive. We developed and pilot-tested a self-administered EHR usability and safety assessment tool, focused on computerized provider order entry (CPOE), which can be used by any facility to identify specific issues. In addition, the tool provides recommendations for improvement. Materials and Methods: An assessment tool consisting of 104 questions was developed and pilot-tested at 2 hospitals, one using a Cerner EHR and the other using Epic. Five physicians at each site participated in and completed the assessment. Participant response accuracy compared to actual EHR interactions, consistency across participants, and usability issues identified through the tool were measured at each site. Results: Across sites, participants answered an average of 46 questions in 23 min with 89.9% of responses either correct or partially correct. The tool identified 8 usability and safety issues at one site and 7 at the other site across medication, laboratory, and radiology CPOE functions. Discussion: The tool shows promise as a method to rapidly evaluate EHR usability and safety and provide guidance on specific areas for improvement. Important improvements to the evaluation tool were identified including the need to clarify certain questions and provide definitions for usability terminology. Conclusion: A self-administered usability and safety assessment tool can serve to identify specific usability and safety issues in the EHR and provide guidance for improvements.
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.