ArticleApplied clinical informatics2025
Identifying Electronic Health Record Tasks and Activity Using Computer Vision.
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
Abstract
Time spent in the electronic health record (EHR) is an important measure of clinical activity. Vendor-derived EHR use metrics may not correspond to actual EHR experience. Raw EHR audit logs enable customized EHR use metrics, but translating discrete timestamps to time intervals is challenging. There are insufficient data available to quantify inactivity between audit log timestamps.This study aimed to develop and validate a computer vision-based model that (1) classifies EHR tasks and identifies task changes and (2) quantifies active-use time from clinician session screen recordings of EHR use. This study also aimed to develop and validate a computer vision-based model that (1) classifies EHR tasks and identifies task changes and (2) quantifies active-use time from clinician session screen recordings of EHR use.We generated 111 minutes of simulated workflow in an Epic sandbox environment for development and training and collected 86 minutes of real-world clinician session recordings for validation. The model used YOLOv8, Tesseract OCR, and a predefined dictionary to perform task classification and task change detection. We developed a frame comparison algorithm to delineate activity from inactivity and thus quantify active time. We compared the model's output of task classification, task change identification, and active time quantification against clinician annotations. We then performed a post hoc sensitivity analysis to identify the model's accuracy when using optimal parameters.Our model classified time spent in various high-level tasks with 94% accuracy. It detected task changes with 90.6% sensitivity. Active-use quantification varied by task, with lower mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) for tasks with clear visual changes (e.g., Results Review) and higher MAPE for tasks with subtle interactions (e.g., Note Entry). A post hoc sensitivity analysis revealed improvement in active-use quantification with a lower threshold of inactivity than initially used.A computer vision approach to identifying tasks performed and measuring time spent in the EHR is feasible. Future work should refine task-specific thresholds and validate across diverse settings. This approach enables defining optimal context-sensitive thresholds for quantifying clinically relevant active EHR time using raw audit log data.
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.