Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37459373›Full record

ArticleJournal of athletic training2024

Organizational Expectations Regarding Documentation Practices in Athletic Training.

Jordan S Devenney, Matthew J Drescher, Matthew J Rivera, Elizabeth R Neil, Lindsey E Eberman

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of athletic training, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Jordan S DevenneyCenter for Sports Medicine and Performance, Indiana State University, Terre Haute.
Matthew J DrescherDepartment of Applied Medicine and Rehabilitation, Indiana State University, Terre Haute.
Matthew J RiveraDepartment of Applied Medicine and Rehabilitation, Indiana State University, Terre Haute.
Elizabeth R NeilDepartment of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA.
Lindsey E EbermanDepartment of Applied Medicine and Rehabilitation, Indiana State University, Terre Haute.
Indiana State University · USTemple University Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

contextAlthough guidance is available, no nationally recognized standard exists for medical documentation in athletic training, leaving individual organizations responsible for setting expectations and enforcing policies. Previous research has examined clinician documentation behaviors; however, the supervisor's role in creating policy and procedures, communicating expectations, and ensuring accountability has not been investigated.

objectiveTo investigate supervisor practices regarding support, hindrance, and enforcement of medical documentation standards at an individual organization level.

designMixed-methods study.

settingOnline surveys and follow-up interviews. PATIENTS OR OTHER

participantsWe criterion sampled supervising athletic trainers (n = 1107) in National Collegiate Athletic Association member schools. The survey collected responses from 64 participants (age = 43 ± 11 years; years of experience as a supervisor = 12 ± 10; access rate = 9.6%; completion rate = 66.7%), and 12 (age = 35 ± 6 years; years of experience as a supervisor = 8 ± 5) participated in a follow-up interview. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used measures of central tendency to summarize survey data and the consensual qualitative research approach with a 3-person data analysis team and multiphase process to create a consensus codebook. We established trustworthiness using multiple-analyst triangulation, member checking, and internal and external auditing.

resultsFewer than half of supervisors reported having formal written organization-level documentation policies (n = 45/93, 48%) and procedures (n = 32/93, 34%) and an expected timeline for completing documentation (n = 24/84, 29%). Participants described a framework relative to orienting new and existing employees, communicating policies and procedures, strategies for holding employees accountable, and identifying purpose. Limitations included lack of time, prioritization of other roles and responsibilities, and assumptions of prior training and record quality.

conclusionDespite a lack of clear policies, procedures, expectations, prioritization, and accountability strategies, supervisors still felt confident in their employees' abilities to create complete and accurate records. This highlights a gap between supervisor and employee perceptions, as practicing athletic trainers have reported uncertainty regarding documentation practices in previous studies. Although supervisors perceive high confidence in their employees, clear organization standards, employer prioritization, and mechanisms for accountability surrounding documentation will result in improved patient care delivery, system outcomes, and legal compliance.

Indexed as

MotivationSportsAdultDocumentationHumansMiddle AgedPatient CareQualitative ResearchSchoolsSurveys and Questionnairesaccountabilityelectronic medical recordsprofessional responsibilitysupervisors

Identifiers

PMID37459373
PMCPMC10895392
OpenAlexW4384499358

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.