ArticleJournal of healthcare informatics research2025
Comparing Care Pathways Between COVID-19 Pandemic Waves Using Electronic Health Records: A Process Mining Case Study.
Article in Journal of healthcare informatics research, 2025. 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.
- Machine learning-based predictions of healthcare contacts following emergency hospitalisation using electronic health records.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Odor classification: Exploring feature performance and imbalanced data learning techniques.PloS one · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic caused rapid shifts in the workflow of many health services, but evidence of how this affected multidisciplinary care settings is limited. In this data study, we propose a process mining approach that utilises timestamped data from electronic health records to compare care provider patterns across pandemic waves. To investigate healthcare patterns during the pandemic, we collected routine events from Scottish hospital episodes in adults with COVID-19 status, generating treatment logs based on care provider input. Conformance checking metrics were used to select the Inductive Miner infrequent (IMi) algorithm for downstream analysis. Visual diagrams from the discovered Petri Nets indicated interactions on provider- and activity-level data subsets. Measures of "cross-log conformance checking" and graph edit distance (GED) further quantified variation in care complexity in adverse subgroups. Our baseline cohort included 1153 patients with COVID-19 linked to 55,212 relevant care provider events. At the conformance checking stage, the IMi model achieved good log fitness ( Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s41666-024-00181-6.
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.