ReviewProceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center)2024
Utilization and efficacy of DotPhrases in the electronic medical record for improving physician documentation.
Review in Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimizing Workflow for OncotypeDX Result Turnaround Time at a Safety Net Hospital.Global journal on quality and safety in healthcare · 2026Article
- Understanding suicide prevention services in pediatric primary care: Feedback from primary care staff.Psychological services · 2026Article
- Authors' Reply: Enhancing Patient Support in Digital Inflammatory Bowel Disease Tools: The Need for Medication Guidance and Decision Support.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- Initial Clinical Impressions Are Absent in Around a Quarter of Adult Emergency Department Patient Consultations: Let's Get Back to Basics.Emergency medicine Australasia : EMA · 2025Article
- A Patient-Specific, Goal-Oriented Exercise Algorithm for Men Receiving Androgen Deprivation Therapy.Clinical journal of oncology nursing · 2025Article
- Electronic health record shortcuts: winning the dot race.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clinical documentation of patient visits has changed over the last 20 years, with the increasing use of electronic records causing a seismic shift in how notes are taken. Electronic note-taking aims at reducing the time taken to document a visit, and the introduction of dot phrases, or DotPhrases, in electronic medical records is a step toward reducing the time required to update patients' charts, which might allow doctors to spend more time with their patients. DotPhrases, abbreviated phrases used in the electronic medical record, help in the simplification of note-taking and the standardization of notes. They also allow for a more comprehensive note from physicians and ensure that no information is undocumented. On the contrary, however, excessive usage of DotPhrases can lead to an excessively long and cumbersome note. This can overwhelm physicians and lead to them missing crucial information that is buried somewhere in the notes. Although there is ample research studying the benefits of DotPhrases, adequate research must also be carried out to understand their shortcomings and disadvantages. This article aims to shed some light on use of DotPhrases and to outline their advantages and disadvantages affecting patient management and 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.