Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40406851›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2025

Technology-Enabled Workplace Learning Through Rethinking Electronic Health Records to Support Performance Feedback: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study.

Anna Janssen, Mia Nazir

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Anna Janssen *School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6611-9651
Mia Nazir *School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0009-0001-7578-3439

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe health sector collects a plethora of electronic health data via digital technologies, such as electronic health records (EHRs) and electronic medical records (EMRs). The primary use of EHRs includes supporting service delivery, providing data on patient information, and health care operations. Secondary uses of these systems can include quality improvement activities and research, and possibly inform policy. One underexplored secondary use of data from these systems is to enable health care professionals to understand their performance, reflect on their practice, and potentially support enhanced professional and workplace learning. There is growing interest and an increase in policies to focus on motivating the use of this type of data as part of mandatory Continuing Professional Development. Despite this, the design of EHRs is not conducive to the use of these systems for reflective practice, and there are few best practice guides for how to scaffold the use of these data for secondary use.

objectiveThe aim of this project is to determine how EHRs and EMRs can be leveraged to enable formative performance feedback for health care professionals. The primary objective is to explore the use of these systems by health care professionals to further understand the current and possible future use of these records for reflective practice, performance feedback, and workplace learning.

methodsThe project will use a mixed methods design to enable a holistic picture of participant behaviors. Study data are being collected over 3 phases. Phase 1 consists of interviewing health care professionals and clinicians about their experiences with EHRs and EMRs. Phase 2 will involve surveying health care professionals about specific EHR features, and phase 3 will encompass workshopping discussions around EMR functionality and design with key informants. Participants for phases 1 and 2 will be a convenience sample of health care professionals who self-select and volunteer to participate in the study. Participants for phase 3 will consist of policy makers, representatives from peak bodies, technology vendors, health care professionals, and others. Data from phase 1 will be thematically analyzed to identify key features of EMR and EHR design for prioritization in phase 2. Phase 2 survey responses will be descriptively analyzed to understand the most important features in record design to support reflective practice. Phase 3 workshop data will be thematically analyzed to identify design insights for EHRs and EMRs that support professional learning.

resultsThe project is currently in its interview phase and is expected to publish results in mid-2025.

conclusionsThe project will generate new knowledge on the extent to which data collected by workplace technologies provide health care professionals with formative performance feedback. It will also develop a conceptual design for EHRs that supports health care professional learning, which could be leveraged by developers of these technologies in future implementations. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/66824.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsHealth PersonnelLearningWorkplaceFeedbackHumansResearch Designdigital healthdigital technologyEHRelectronic health recordsmixed methodsprofessional learningreflective practicetechnology

Identifiers

PMID40406851
PMCPMC12144470

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.