ArticlePloS one2024
A human centered design approach to define and measure documentation quality using an EHR virtual simulation.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring Provider Perspectives on Gaps in Trauma-Informed Care Delivery Within the Acute Care Surgery Timeline at a Federally Qualified Health Center: Human-Centered Design Study.JMIR perioperative medicine · 2026Article
- Incompleteness of Electronic Health Records: An Impending Process Problem Within Healthcare.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Electronic health record (EHR) documentation serves multiple functions, including recording patient health status, enabling interprofessional communication, supporting billing, and providing data to support the quality infrastructure of a Learning Healthcare System. There is no definition and standardized method to assess documentation quality in EHRs. Using a human-centered design (HCD) approach, we define and describe a method to measure documentation quality. Documentation quality was defined as timely, accurate, user-centered, and efficient. Measurement of quality used a virtual simulated standardized patient visit via an EHR vendor platform. By observing and recording documentation efforts, nurse practitioners (NPs) (N = 12) documented the delivery of an Age-Friendly Health System (AFHS) 4Ms (what Matters, Medication, Mentation, and Mobility) clinic visit using a standardized case. Results for timely documentation indicated considerable variability in completion times of documenting the 4Ms. Accuracy varied, as there were many types of episodes of erroneous documentation and extra time in seconds in documenting the 4Ms. The type and frequency of erroneous documentation efforts were related to navigation burden when navigating to different documentation tabs. The evaluated system demonstrated poor usability, with most participants scoring between 60 and 70 on the System Usability Scale (SUS). Efficiency, measured as click burden (the number of clicks used to navigate through a software system), revealed significant variability in the number of clicks required, with the NPs averaging approximately 13 clicks above the minimum requirement. The HCD methodology used in this study to assess the documentation quality proved feasible and provided valuable information on the quality of documentation. By assessing the quality of documentation, the gathered data can be leveraged to enhance documentation, optimize user experience, and elevate the quality of data within a Learning Healthcare System.
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.