ArticleApplied clinical informatics2025
Toward a Provider Builder Maturity Model to Empower Clinicians to Actively Participate in Electronic Health Record Design.
Article in Applied clinical informatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundEngagement of clinicians who understand clinical workflows and technology constraints can accelerate the development and implementation of better electronic health record (EHR) designs that improve quality and reduce burnout. Provider builder programs can accelerate clinical informatics education for a broader coalition of clinical specialties.
objectivesIn this State of the Art/Best Practice paper, we aim to (1) propose a provider builder maturity model informed by the experience of three institutions using a single EHR vendor (Epic Systems) and (2) describe the program elements and relationships necessary to advance along this model to yield organizational benefits.
methodsWe used a modified version of the Glaser State-of-the-Art approach, gathering consensus among a small group of experts at institutions with successful provider builder programs. The model was updated through meetings with a larger group of experts and then feedback from presentation at national conferences and the American Medical Informatics Association's Maturity Model Working Group.
resultsThe final maturity model describes the characteristics and suggested next steps beginning from Planting the Seed (Stage 0) and progressing through Lone Wolves (Stage 1), a Community of Builders (Stage 2), Organizational Structure (Stage 3), a Council of Builders (Stage 4), and Informatics in the Room Where it Happens (Stage 5). We also describe the journeys of three organizations through these stages.
conclusionA provider builder maturity model can help guide organizations on their journey engaging clinicians in collaborative EHR design to promote quality and safety and reduce burnout.
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.