ArticleJNCI cancer spectrum2023
Ctrl-C: a cross-sectional study of the electronic health record usage patterns of US oncology clinicians.
Article in JNCI cancer spectrum, 2023. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- EHR perception and momentary well-being in oncology professionals.ESMO real world data and digital oncology · 2026Article
- Physicians' Use of Electronic Health Record Data Elements and Decision Support Tools in Heart Failure Management: User-Centered Cross-Sectional Survey Study.JMIR cardio · 2025Article
- Variation in Complete Blood Count Reports Across US Hospitals.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- The intersecting time, administrative, and financial burdens of a cancer diagnosis.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2025Article
- Patterns in Symptoms Preceding Acute Care in Patients With Cancer.JAMA network open · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite some positive impact, the use of electronic health records (EHRs) has been associated with negative effects, such as emotional exhaustion. We sought to compare EHR use patterns for oncology vs nononcology medical specialists. In this cross-sectional study, we employed EHR usage data for 349 ambulatory health-care systems nationwide collected from the vendor Epic from January to August 2019. We compared note composition, message volume, and time in the EHR system for oncology vs nononcology clinicians. Compared with nononcology medical specialists, oncologists had a statistically significantly greater percentage of notes derived from Copy and Paste functions but less SmartPhrase use. They received more total EHR messages per day than other medical specialists, with a higher proportion of results and system-generated messages. Our results point to priorities for enhancing EHR systems to meet the needs of oncology clinicians, particularly as related to facilitating the complex documentation, results, and therapy involved in oncology care.
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.