Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42213899›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2026

The Regional Implementation of an Electronic Health Record-Integrated Ambient Scribe in Primary and Secondary Care in England: Real-Time Qualitative Evaluation.

Kathrin Cresswell, Catharine Rose, Jessica Howdle, Lucas Martinus Seuren, Robin Williams

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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.

Kathrin CresswellUsher Institute, University of Edinburgh, 5-7 Little France Road, Edinburgh BioQuarter-Gate 3, Edinburgh, EH16 4UX, Scotland, 44 131 651 7869.ORCID 0000-0001-6634-9537
Catharine RoseEvaluation Hub, University of Worcester, Worcester, England, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-9786-1389
Jessica HowdleEvaluation Hub, University of Worcester, Worcester, England, United Kingdom.ORCID 0009-0006-9402-7803
Lucas Martinus SeurenUsher Institute, University of Edinburgh, 5-7 Little France Road, Edinburgh BioQuarter-Gate 3, Edinburgh, EH16 4UX, Scotland, 44 131 651 7869.ORCID 0000-0001-9631-3113
Robin WilliamsInstitute for the Study of Science, Technology and Innovation, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland.ORCID 0000-0002-9044-4611

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: There is significant potential for ambient scribe technology to enhance health care productivity, with a growing range of applications being developed and implemented internationally. Strong organizational drivers to improve efficiency, coupled with the technology's potential to help address clinician burnout, are accelerating interest and adoption. However, limited attention has been paid to the integration of such systems within electronic health records and unintended consequences, as stakeholders navigate their implementation and integration into clinical practice. Objective: This study therefore aimed to explore the processes involved in implementing and adopting ambient scribe technology across diverse health care settings. Methods: We conducted a real-time, longitudinal qualitative evaluation of a pilot implementation of an integrated ambient scribe system across National Health Service primary care and secondary hospital settings within a care system in the Midlands region of England. Data collection involved in-depth one-to-one interviews conducted in several phases: an initial scoping study to identify key interests and stakeholders for inclusion, followed by an implementation study with participants involved in the pilot. We also conducted 16 hours of nonparticipant observations of consultations. The implementation study gathered data at 2 time points, before implementation and 3 to 4 weeks after, to capture experiences, changes, and emerging impacts over time. Results: We collected data from 45 individuals. Use cases varied across settings and shaped how ambient scribe systems were deployed. Differences between general practice and secondary care in documentation purpose, format, and workflow created challenges for developing and validating templates, though the technology showed flexibility across contexts. Automated note-taking often improved patient interaction but required clinicians to adjust how they spoke to ensure the technology captured their reasoning. Outputs were sometimes generic, reinforcing defensive documentation and reducing personal tone or contextual recall. Integration pathways carried distinct trade-offs: stand-alone systems (which were used by many stakeholders in our study) were easier to adopt but offered limited long-term benefits, while integrated systems required greater effort and standardization, yet promised improved efficiency and safety. Conclusions: The ambient scribe market remains immature and volatile, creating strategic uncertainty for health systems. Careful procurement approaches are needed to balance the risks and benefits of integrated versus stand-alone systems, while aligning user demand with organizational needs for integration.

Indexed as

DocumentationElectronic Health RecordsEnglandHumansLongitudinal StudiesPilot ProjectsPrimary Health CareQualitative ResearchSecondary Health CareState Medicineambient scribeshealth careintegrationnote-takingprocess evaluationqualitativesociotechnical

Identifiers

PMID42213899
PMCPMC13220976

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.