Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40053758›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2025

25 Years of Electronic Health Record Implementation Processes: Scoping Review.

Harriet Finnegan, Nicola Mountford

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Harriet FinneganSchool of Business, Maynooth University, Kildare, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-1433-9991
Nicola MountfordSchool of Business, Maynooth University, Kildare, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0001-5485-9425

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundElectronic health record (EHR) systems have undergone substantial evolution over the past 25 years, transitioning from rudimentary digital repositories to sophisticated tools that are integral to modern health care delivery. These systems have the potential to increase efficiency and improve patient care. However, for these systems to reach their potential, we need to understand how the process of EHR implementation works.

objectiveThis scoping review aimed to examine the implementation process of EHRs from 1999 to 2024 and to articulate process-focused recommendations for future EHR implementations that build on this history of EHR research.

methodsWe conducted a scoping literature review following a systematic methodological framework. A total of 5 databases were selected from the disciplines of medicine and business: EBSCO, PubMed, Embase, IEEE Explore, and Scopus. The search included studies published from 1999 to 2024 that addressed the process of implementing an EHR. Keywords included "EHR," "EHRS," "Electronic Health Record*," "EMR," "EMRS," "Electronic Medical Record*," "implemen*," and "process." The findings were reported in accordance with the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist. The selected literature was thematically coded using NVivo qualitative analysis software, with the results reported qualitatively.

resultsThis review included 90 studies that described the process of EHR implementation in different settings. The studies identified key elements, such as the role of the government and vendors, the importance of communication and relationships, the provision of training and support, and the implementation approach and cost. Four process-related categories emerged from these results: compliance processes, collaboration processes, competence-development processes, and process costs.

conclusionsAlthough EHRs hold immense promise in improving patient care, enhancing research capabilities, and optimizing health care efficiency, there is a pressing need to examine the actual implementation process to understand how to approach implementation. Our findings offer 7 process-focused recommendations for EHR implementation formed from analysis of the selected literature.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsHumansEHRelectronic health record systemelectronic medical recordEMRimplementationprocessscoping review

Identifiers

PMID40053758
PMCPMC11914847

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.