Observational studyFamily medicine2025
Relationships Among Physician Vendor-Derived Proficiency Score, Gender, and Time in the Electronic Health Record.
Observational study in Family medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Use of Epic Signal Data to Evaluate the Impact of an "EHR Pearls" Curriculum.PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.) · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesElectronic health record (EHR) customization is proposed to mitigate EHR-related burnout. Gender disparities in EHR usage are established, though less is known regarding differences in customization and its impact on EHR time. This study examined gender differences in vendor-derived proficiency score (PS) and its relationship to EHR time.
methodsThis was a retrospective observational study of ambulatory EHR use for adult primary care and medical subspecialty physicians at an academic safety-net health care system. The EHR vendor provided a physician PS (0-10), derived from customization and efficiency tool utilization. Primary outcomes were PS, time in system per day, and time in system per appointment stratified by gender. We used multiple variable linear regression to determine whether gender differences persisted with the inclusion of other factors.
resultsA total of 228 physicians were included in the study; 122 were women, and 106 were men. Women had higher median PS (7.6 vs 6.6, P=.021) and EHR time per day (150.5 vs 119.9 minutes, P=.013), but no difference in time per appointment (24.7 vs 26.1 minutes, P=.665). After adjusting for potential confounders, gender remained a significant predictor of PS, but not time in EHR. Higher PS was significantly associated with greater time in the system per appointment, but not per day.
conclusionsWhile women had higher PS than men, gender was not significantly associated with measures of EHR time after adjusting for potential confounders. Higher PS was associated with greater time in the EHR per appointment, suggesting factors that influence EHR time are complex and varied.
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.