ArticleJMIR nursing2026
Exploring the Impact of Electronic Medical Record-Enabled Versus Paper-Based Systems on the Quality of Nursing Handover: Comparative Case-Study.
Article in JMIR nursing, 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
Background: Ineffective clinical handover has the potential to compromise patient safety and quality of care. Standardizing the handover process is a widely adopted improvement strategy intended to reduce failures of information transfer. By enabling real-time access to patient information, electronic medical records (EMRs) could address communication issues inherent to nursing handover. Objective: This case study sought to compare the quality of nursing handover occurring at EMR-enabled sites with that occurring at paper-based sites, within a single Australian public health service. Methods: A comparative case study design was used, using quantitative data collected from observational audits of 60 handovers and posthandover surveys conducted in EMR-enabled and paper-based ward environments. Handover quality was measured through compliance with the organization's Clinical Handover Standard and staff-reported perceptions, enabling comparison between cohorts. Results: Compared with paper-based wards, EMR-enabled wards demonstrated more consistent communication of clinical alerts and risks and fewer interruptions, whereas paper-based wards showed higher rates of bedside handover and patient engagement. Conclusions: EMR implementation alone does not ensure high-quality nursing handover. EMR interface design and functionality may act as a barrier to bedside handover and patient engagement, and contribute to continued reliance on paper-based artifacts. Targeted EMR design and nursing informatics-led optimization are required to better support nursing handover as a complex and cognitively challenging communication process.
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.