Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38465069›Full record

ReviewCureus2024

Overcoming Electronic Medical Records Adoption Challenges in Saudi Arabia.

Anas Alhur

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Transforming healthcare: Saudi Arabia's vision 2030 healthcare model.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

1 author.

Anas AlhurHealth Informatics, University of Hail College of Public Health and Health Informatics, Hail, SAU.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the digital era, the seamless integration of electronic medical records (EMR) stands as a pivotal milestone in transforming healthcare delivery, with Saudi Arabia at the forefront of this revolution in the Middle East. This literature review comprehensively explores the challenges and opportunities associated with adopting EMR in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) in alignment with the nation's Vision 2030 healthcare objectives. The review synthesizes research from various scholarly sources, utilizing databases such as PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and regional databases, and focuses on literature published between 2010 and 2023. Our methodology included a strategic combination of keywords and a stringent selection criterion to ensure a focus on relevant EMR adoption studies within KSA. The review addresses key aspects of EMR adoption, including technical challenges, financial constraints, human factors, cultural and organizational barriers, privacy and security concerns, and policy and regulatory challenges. It also explores the integration of EMR with other digital health initiatives like telehealth, personal health records, and community pharmacy services. The findings reveal a complex interplay of factors influencing EMR adoption, highlighting the need for comprehensive strategies that address technical, financial, cultural, and policy-related barriers. The review concludes that while significant challenges exist, strategic approaches and solutions tailored to the specific context of Saudi Arabia can effectively facilitate EMR integration, thereby enhancing healthcare quality and efficiency in line with the nation's Vision 2030 goals.

Indexed as

digital health transformationelectronic medical recordshealthcare information technologypatient data privacy and securitysaudi arabiavision 2030

Identifiers

PMID38465069
PMCPMC10924290

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.