SynthesisJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2025
Supporting clinical reasoning through visual summarization and presentation of patient data: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Value operating system: a practical framework to measure outcomes-per-cost at the episode level.BMJ open quality · 2026Article
- LabVis: usability testing of a prototype tool for integrating timeline graphs and clinical notes.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- Clinical decision-making and artificial intelligence.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesClinicians retrieve data from electronic health record (EHR) systems and summarize them into clinical information to accomplish clinical reasoning and decision-making tasks. Visualization, using meaningful summarization methods and intuitive presentation approaches, can enhance this process. This systematic review examines how EHR data are summarized, visualized, and aligned with the 7 clinical reasoning and decision-making tasks shared by clinicians. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe searched 7 databases for research articles on individual patient EHR related to visualization, clinical decision-support, and patient summaries. Evidence from included studies was extracted for EHR data types, information summarization methods, visualization strategies, clinician characteristics, and evaluations. The synthesized evidence generated data-information-visualization (data-info-vis) flows.
resultsWe included 112 studies of which 70 (62.5%) conducted detailed usability evaluations, while 42 (37.5%) did not report any evaluations. Gaps remain in deriving actionable insights from EHR data, particularly for tasks requiring data quality reports. Three representative data-info-vis flows emerge. The first uses structured data to generate patterns for temporal visualizations, supporting tasks such as diagnosis and patient management. The second abstracts data into miniature charts, aiding situation-aware understanding and knowledge synthesis. The third features high-level visual metaphors for complex and overarching tasks, such as achieving better care. DISCUSSION AND
conclusionThis review identifies 2 primary visualization strategies: (1) timeline-based presentations emphasizing temporal trends and longitudinal tracking, and (2) snapshot-based approaches focusing on status overviews and rapid assessments. The identified critical design approaches and distinct data-info-vis flows are tailored to clinical reasoning and decision-making tasks, offering insights for developing visualization-based decision-support tools.
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.