Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36171583›Full record

SynthesisBMC medical informatics and decision making2022

An exploration into physician and surgeon data sensemaking: a qualitative systematic review using thematic synthesis.

Emma Whitelock-Wainwright, Jia Wei Koh, Alexander Whitelock-Wainwright, Stella Talic, David Rankin, Dragan Gašević

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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.

Emma Whitelock-WainwrightFaculty of Information Technology, Centre for Learning Analytics (CoLAM), Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. Emma.Whitelock-Wainwright@monash.edu.
Jia Wei KohFaculty of Information Technology, Centre for Learning Analytics (CoLAM), Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Alexander Whitelock-WainwrightFaculty of Information Technology, Centre for Learning Analytics (CoLAM), Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Stella TalicSchool of Public Health and Preventative Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
David RankinClinical Governance and Informatics, Cabrini Health, Melbourne, Australia.
Dragan GaševićFaculty of Information Technology, Centre for Learning Analytics (CoLAM), Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Monash University · AUCabrini Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Providing electronic health data to medical practitioners to reflect on their performance can lead to improved clinical performance and quality of care. Understanding the sensemaking process that is enacted when practitioners are presented with such data is vital to ensure an improvement in performance. Thus, the primary objective of this research was to explore physician and surgeon sensemaking when presented with electronic health data associated with their clinical performance. A systematic literature review was conducted to analyse qualitative research that explored physicians and surgeons experiences with electronic health data associated with their clinical performance published between January 2010 and March 2022. Included articles were assessed for quality, thematically synthesised, and discussed from the perspective of sensemaking. The initial search strategy for this review returned 8,829 articles that were screened at title and abstract level. Subsequent screening found 11 articles that met the eligibility criteria and were retained for analyses. Two articles met all of the standards within the chosen quality assessment (Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research, SRQR). Thematic synthesis generated five overarching themes: data communication, performance reflection, infrastructure, data quality, and risks. The confidence of such findings is reported using CERQual (Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research). The way the data is communicated can impact sensemaking which has implications on what is learned and has impact on future performance. Many factors including data accuracy, validity, infrastructure, culture can also impact sensemaking and have ramifications on future practice. Providing data in order to support performance reflection is not without risks, both behavioural and affective. The latter of which can impact the practitioner's ability to effectively make sense of the data. An important consideration when data is presented with the intent to improve performance.Registration This systematic review was registered with Prospero, registration number: CRD42020197392.

Indexed as

Health PersonnelSurgeonsCommunicationDelivery of Health CareHumansQualitative ResearchContinued professional developmentDigital healthLifelong learningPerformance reflectionPhysicians and surgeonsPractice analyticsProfessional learningSensemaking

Identifiers

PMID36171583
PMCPMC9520820
OpenAlexW4297473731

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.