Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36821760›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2023

Novel Note Templates to Enhance Signal and Reduce Noise in Medical Documentation: Prospective Improvement Study.

Jonah Feldman, Adam Goodman, Katherine Hochman, Eesha Chakravartty, Jonathan Austrian, Eduardo Iturrate, Brian Bosworth, Archana Saxena, Marwa Moussa, Dina Chenouda and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2023. 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
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Addressing Note Bloat: Solutions for Effective Clinical Documentation.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2025
    Article
  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

14 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jonah FeldmanMedical Center Information Technology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5821-0946
Adam GoodmanDivision of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3429-1067
Katherine HochmanDepartment of Medicine, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1724-9465
Eesha ChakravarttyMedical Center Information Technology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6306-8246
Jonathan AustrianMedical Center Information Technology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0016-4705
Eduardo IturrateMedical Center Information Technology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6434-2518
Brian BosworthDepartment of Medicine, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9964-9859
Archana SaxenaDepartment of Medicine, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5498-4813
Marwa MoussaDepartment of Medicine, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5894-9257
Dina ChenoudaDepartment of Medicine, NYU Long Island School of Medicine, Mineola, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5235-6218
Frank VolpicelliNYU Langone Health, Brooklyn, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6288-6335
Nicole AdlerDepartment of Medicine, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7131-8556
Joseph WeisstuchNYU Langone Health, Brooklyn, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-7877-2973
Paul TestaMedical Center Information Technology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1512-9638
NYU Langone Health · USLong Island University · USNew York University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe introduction of electronic workflows has allowed for the flow of raw uncontextualized clinical data into medical documentation. As a result, many electronic notes have become replete of "noise" and deplete clinically significant "signals." There is an urgent need to develop and implement innovative approaches in electronic clinical documentation that improve note quality and reduce unnecessary bloating.

objectiveThis study aims to describe the development and impact of a novel set of templates designed to change the flow of information in medical documentation.

methodsThis is a multihospital nonrandomized prospective improvement study conducted on the inpatient general internal medicine service across 3 hospital campuses at the New York University Langone Health System. A group of physician leaders representing each campus met biweekly for 6 months. The output of these meetings included (1) a conceptualization of the note bloat problem as a dysfunction in information flow, (2) a set of guiding principles for organizational documentation improvement, (3) the design and build of novel electronic templates that reduced the flow of extraneous information into provider notes by providing link outs to best practice data visualizations, and (4) a documentation improvement curriculum for inpatient medicine providers. Prior to go-live, pragmatic usability testing was performed with the new progress note template, and the overall user experience was measured using the System Usability Scale (SUS). Primary outcome measures after go-live include template utilization rate and note length in characters.

resultsIn usability testing among 22 medicine providers, the new progress note template averaged a usability score of 90.6 out of 100 on the SUS. A total of 77% (17/22) of providers strongly agreed that the new template was easy to use, and 64% (14/22) strongly agreed that they would like to use the template frequently. In the 3 months after template implementation, general internal medicine providers wrote 67% (51,431/76,647) of all inpatient notes with the new templates. During this period, the organization saw a 46% (2768/6191), 47% (3505/7819), and 32% (3427/11,226) reduction in note length for general medicine progress notes, consults, and history and physical notes, respectively, when compared to a baseline measurement period prior to interventions.

conclusionsA bundled intervention that included the deployment of novel templates for inpatient general medicine providers significantly reduced average note length on the clinical service. Templates designed to reduce the flow of extraneous information into provider notes performed well during usability testing, and these templates were rapidly adopted across all hospital campuses. Further research is needed to assess the impact of novel templates on note quality, provider efficiency, and patient outcomes.

Indexed as

clinical documentationclinical informaticsdecision supporthospital datamedical informatics

Identifiers

PMID36821760
PMCPMC10134024
OpenAlexW4320926978

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.