ArticleApplied clinical informatics2025
User-Centered Design in Real-Time: Utilization of an Insider Position to Inform Design and Adoption.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Electronic health records (EHRs) have significantly impacted healthcare improving access to patient information and enhancing communication among the health care team. However, the lack of usability and increased documentation burden has greatly contributed to clinician burnout. Improvements in EHR design that include physician input are critical to developing specific changes that make EHRs more intuitive and less cumbersome to use; however, it can be challenging to gather input from physicians with full clinical workloads.We sought to establish a practical, repeatable framework for soliciting and integrating user-centered design elements into our vendor EHR system utilizing meaningful clinician involvement and feedback.Over a 1-year period, physician volunteers were given access to a position within the EHR where new features were made available for testing before widespread deployment. Real-time feedback was obtained through a shared platform with institutional IS support leaders and our vendor executive and used to impact design and broader implementation decisions. Physician feedback regarding the testing process was obtained via survey.Thirteen physicians and 15 support staff were given access to a separate unique EHR position to test new EHR features during real-world clinical work at their discretion. Feedback was given via a teams chat function resulting in 1,024 messages from 28 users over a 1-year period peaking in accordance with new features made available. During two primary phases, 8 new EHR features were tested to elicit feedback prior to adoption. Six of the eight features were adopted after initial testing while two required additional changes to improve functionality prior to widespread implementation. The majority found this method intuitive and highly effective in testing new EHR features.Healthcare EHR workflows are effective and well-adopted when informed and designed by clinical users. The insider position was shown to be an effective method for testing new features to gain valuable insight without overburdening clinicians.
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.