ArticleBMC health services research2026
Development of a digital tool to support overview in complex patient cases: Which information elements support the clinical workflow?
Article in BMC health services research, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThis study aimed to describe the development and usability testing of the digital tool DigiTeam to support physicians’ clinical workflow and identify key information elements to support clinicians in managing complex patient cases.
methodThis qualitative study was guided by user-centered principles with observations and interviews of physicians who tested different versions of DigiTeam. Three patients volunteered to have their full electronic health records (EHR) from the following sources: general practice, hospital, and, if relevant, municipal health and social care services, included in DigiTeam. The prototype was developed to gain knowledge on how to present complex patient case information in EHR. The key clinical principles guiding the development were to support person-centered, integrated, and proactive care. The design principles included providing overviews before details, summarizing information, and using timelines. The data were continuously analyzed to support iterative development.
resultsSeventeen physicians participated, and five versions were developed. The start page was simplified and at the end included only three key information elements that supported a quick overview: patient voice, medical history summary, and main health problems with healthcare contacts displayed on a timeline. The participants highly valued the prominent inclusion of the patient’s voice, which was maintained throughout. The elements on the start page were clickable, directed to pages with summarized information, and hyperlinks to clinical notes for further details and verification of the summarized information. The participants found the summarized information valuable but initially too text-heavy, resulting in versions with less text while retaining essential details.
conclusionIt was possible to develop a digital tool that supported person-centered, integrated, and proactive care by summarizing information to provide an overview of three main information elements: what matters to the patient, the main health problems, and medical history, with easy ways to obtain more detailed information. The next step is to test the effect of DigiTeam in a randomized controlled trial. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.