ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2026
Clinician Perceptions of Virtual Scribe Use: A Survey Study.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Impact of an Ambient AI Scribe Among Clinicians and Patients: Real-World Prospective Observational Time-Motion Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVirtual scribes are being explored as documentation support tools to reduce physician burden and enhance physician experience.
objectiveTo characterize the relationship between virtual scribe use and physician wellbeing and identify physician characteristics associated with benefitting from virtual scribe support.
designCross-sectional mixed-methods survey study.
participantsA total of 113 ambulatory care physicians at a large, academic health system who used a virtual scribe from 2017 to 2023. MAIN MEASURES: A 14-item survey assessed the perceived impact of virtual scribes on clinician satisfaction, wellbeing, and relationships with patients. Chi-square tests and multivariable analyses assessed associations between these outcomes and key predictors (gender, specialty, years in practice, clinic session frequency per week, years of scribe use). Qualitative analyses of free-text survey comments identified key major and minor themes regarding clinician experiences with virtual scribes. KEY
resultsOf 430 eligible participants in the virtual scribe program, 113 physicians responded to the survey (response rate 26%), the majority of whom were female (68%), from primary care specialties (78%), and had used a scribe for at least 2 years (60%). Sixty-six percent reported improved wellbeing and 61% noted enhanced relationships with patients with virtual scribe use. Non-primary care physicians were more likely to report enhanced satisfaction (aOR 10.12 [2.06, 49.62]), wellbeing (aOR 34.60 [5.26, 227.64]), and relationship with patients (aOR 6.34 [1.24, 32.34]). Males also had increased odds of improved satisfaction (aOR 3.62 [1.19, 11.05]) and relationship with patients (aOR 4.71 [1.25, 17.78]). Qualitative themes included scribe service-related issues, documentation concerns, and provider-scribe workflow impacts.
conclusionsMost clinicians using virtual scribes reported improved wellbeing and perceived relationship with patients. Non-primary care physicians and male physicians specifically had a greater likelihood of endorsing improved overall wellness with virtual scribe use. Future work should explore differential satisfaction with virtual scribe use between primary care and non-primary care specialties.
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.