ArticleBMC health services research2024
Computer-assisted medical history taking prior to patient consultation in the outpatient care setting: a prospective pilot project.
Article in BMC health services research, 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.
- Evaluation of Prompt Design and Internal Reasoning in Chatbot-Based Medical History Taking: Simulation Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Safety-First Framework for AI-Enabled Anamnesis in Head and Neck Surgery: Evidence Synthesis from a Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFeeding patients' self-reported medical history into the diagnostic care process may accelerate workflows in clinical routine.
methodsWe prospectively piloted a novel medical history documentation system in a German cardiological outpatient practice and evaluated its feasibility and perceived usefulness. Based on a generic software that allows to record structured information, a customized solution for the cooperating practice was developed and implemented. Prior to the consultation of the physician, the patient used a tablet that guided the user through a structured comprehensive workflow to document the medical history. The retrieved information was arranged by the software into a ready-to-use text format, presented to the physician in an editable form and added to her report. Three user-centered endpoints were explored: i) Appropriateness-measured by the duration of a patient interview; ii) Patient acceptance-assessed by three questions to patients; iii) Usefulness-operationalized by multiple ratings of the physician.
resultsA total of 2,513 patients were approached of which 2,415 provided complete histories. The system was assessed as appropriate for the practical workflow in terms of time and workflows. The patient-system interaction was rated favourably by patients including elderly ones. The system was regarded useful by the physician, reducing her daily workload by about one hour.
conclusionsAutomated history-taking tools deployed before consultation could support physicians in obtaining patients' medical histories, thereby reducing professionals' perceived workload. The technical and methodological limitations of our study should be respected, calling for additional future evaluations.
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.