ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2026
Effect of use of ambient listening technology on patient-reported communication and satisfaction ratings.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesEvaluate the impact of ambient listening AI scribe technology for drafting notes on patient-reported communication and satisfaction ratings of their physician during ambulatory visits. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe conducted a pilot (April-August 2024) during which 31 physicians across multiple specialties could use an AI scribe during ambulatory visits. Patient surveys from AI-scribe supported visits were compared with pre-pilot surveys in the previous 12 months, and to 125 control physicians, following a difference-in-differences approach. Logistic regression evaluated change in the odds of receiving the highest score for 5 questions, focused on patient ratings of communication (4 items) and overall satisfaction with their physician (1 item).
resultsAmong 31 917 surveys (7164 pilot; 24 753 control), patient ratings were high. The pre-post change in communication and satisfaction scores did not differ significantly between pilot and control physicians. However, for 3 questions (concern provider showed, explanation provider gave, and likelihood of recommending their provider), ratings increased for pilot physicians while declining for controls without reaching statistical significance. DISCUSSION: We did not find evidence of AI scribes worsening or enhancing patient experiences. Continued evaluation is warranted to ensure positive patient experiences as AI tools expand in clinical care.
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.