ArticleAEM education and training2024
Impact of an automated patient outcome feedback system on emergency medicine resident patient follow-up: An interrupted time series analysis.
Article in AEM education and training, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- From Outcomes to Insights: A Structured Reflection Tool for Resident Development in Practice Based-Learning and Improvement.Journal of graduate medical education · 2025Article
- Electronic Health Record User Dashboard for Optimization of Surgical Resident Procedural Reporting.Applied clinical informatics · 2025Article
- Impact of an automated patient outcome feedback system on emergency medicine resident patient follow-up: An interrupted time series analysis.AEM education and training · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Emergency medicine (EM) residents desire, but often lack, reliable feedback of patient outcomes following handoffs to other providers. This gap is a substantial barrier to calibrating their diagnostic decision making and learning. To address this educational priority, we developed and evaluated the Post-Handoff Reports of Outcomes (PHAROS) system-an automated system within our electronic health record (EHR) to deliver provider-specific patient outcome feedback. Methods: PHAROS includes: (1) individualized lists of patients seen and brief summaries of each case, (2) flags for important posthandoff events, and (3) links to charts to facilitate review. Starting June 2020, we coupled PHAROS with a resident educational session and individualized emails every 2 weeks outlining patients seen, number of posthandoff events, and instructions on how to access the PHAROS system. Results: From July 2017 through April 2022, we measured the proportion of handoffs followed by reaccessing patients' charts between 2 and 14 days posthandoff-a proxy for following up on the patient's outcomes. We performed an interrupted time series analysis on this outcome to determine if PHAROS was associated with a significant change in the trend of our outcome over time. Our secondary outcome was the number of times PHAROS was viewed each month. Our primary outcome had a significant increase in the slope over time (+0.13%/month, Conclusions: The PHAROS system was associated with a significant increase in the rate of posthandoff chart reaccess among EM residents over time. The PHAROS project demonstrated the feasibility of harnessing the capabilities of the EHR to create an automated system to support EM trainee feedback of patient outcomes-a key component of diagnostic calibration and learning.
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.