Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41589219›Full record

ReviewJAMIA open2026

People, process, technology: a framework for clinical informatics fellowship applicants to evaluate programs.

Jared Silberlust, Priyanka Solanki, Jonathan Austrian, Paul Testa, Nicholas Genes

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JAMIA open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Jared SilberlustMCIT Department of Health Informatics, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY 10016, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5957-2252
Priyanka SolankiMCIT Department of Health Informatics, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY 10016, United States.
Jonathan AustrianMCIT Department of Health Informatics, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY 10016, United States.
Paul TestaMCIT Department of Health Informatics, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY 10016, United States.
Nicholas GenesMCIT Department of Health Informatics, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY 10016, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: To propose a structured framework for evaluating and comparing clinical informatics fellowship programs using the People, Process, and Technology (PPT) model. Materials and Methods: We adapted Leavitt's organizational theory to create a three-pillar framework operationalized with features relevant to fellowship applicants and directors. We then applied this framework to a random sample of 18 program websites. Results: The PPT framework categorizes key fellowship characteristics into People (eg, mentorship, co-fellows, diversity), Process (eg, clinical duties, research emphasis, education), and Technology (eg, EHR systems, technical training, remote work). A visual grid illustrates variation in operational versus research focus and levels of mentorship. Website analysis revealed inconsistent transparency and detail. Discussion: The PPT framework provides a systematic, accessible approach for applicants to assess fellowship fit and for programs to communicate their strengths. Conclusion: Standardizing fellowship descriptions using the PPT model may improve alignment between applicant goals and program offerings, enhancing both the application process and training experience.

Indexed as

Clinical Informatics FellowshipGraduate Medical EducationPeople Process Technology

Identifiers

PMID41589219
PMCPMC12831926

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.