ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2022
User experience of self-reported computerized medical history taking for acute chest pain: The Clinical Expert Operating System Chest Pain Danderyd Study.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03439449 (Computerized, Patient-entered Medical Histories for Managing Chest Pain in the Emergency Department), which is not on this 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.
Computerized, Patient-entered Medical Histories for Managing Chest Pain in the Emergency Department
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Computerized Self-Reported Medical History Taking to Support Early Rule Out of Major Adverse Cardiac Events in Patients With Acute Chest Pain: Post Hoc Analysis of the CLEOS-CPDS Prospective Cohort Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Observational
- Patient Perspectives on Digital Technology and Experiences of Computerized History-Taking for Chest Pain Management in the Emergency Department: CLEOS-CPDS Prospective Cohort Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Article
- Performance of computerized self-reported medical history taking and HEAR score for safe early rule-out of cardiac events in acute chest pain patients: the CLEOS-CPDS prospective cohort study.European heart journal. Digital health · 2025Article
- Are medical history data fit for risk stratification of patients with chest pain in emergency care? Comparing data collected from patients using computerized history taking with data documented by physicians in the electronic health record in the CLEOS-CPDS prospective cohort study.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024Article
- User experience of self-reported computerized medical history taking for acute chest pain: The Clinical Expert Operating System Chest Pain Danderyd Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveChest pain is one of the most common complaints in emergency departments (EDs). Self-reported computerized history taking (CHT) programmes can be used for interpretation of the clinical significance of medical information coming directly from patients. The adoption of CHT in clinical practice depends on reactions and attitudes to the technology from patients and their belief that the technology will have benefits for their medical care. The study objective was to explore the user experience of the self-reported CHT programme Clinical Expert Operating System (CLEOS) in the setting of patients visiting an ED for acute chest pain.
methodsThis qualitative interview study is part of the ongoing CLEOS-Chest Pain Danderyd Study. A subset (n = 84) of the larger sample who had taken part in self-reported history taking during waiting times at the ED were contacted by telephone and n = 54 (64%) accepted participation. An interview guide with open-ended questions was used and the text was analysed using directed content analysis.
resultsThe patients' experiences of the CLEOS programme were overall positive although some perceived it as extensive. The programme was well accepted and despite the busy environment, patients were highly motivated and deemed it helpful to make a diagnosis. Six categories of user experience emerged: The clinical context, The individual context, Time aspect, Acceptability of the programme, Usability of the programme and Perceptions of usefulness in a clinical setting.
conclusionsThe programme was well accepted by most patients in the stressful environment at ED although some found it difficult to answer all the questions. Adjustments to the extent of an interview to better suit the context of the clinical use should be a future development of the programme. The findings suggest that CHT programmes can be integrated as a standard process for collecting self-reported medical history data in the ED setting.
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.