ArticleBMC health services research2026
Electronic health records in patient care: strengths, facilitators, challenges, and future directions-a scoping review.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundElectronic health records are crucial medical informatics elements increasingly utilized in industrialized nations to enhance health care services. Given the significance of electronic health records in improving monitoring and evaluation, along with the necessity to deliver quality, cost-effective, and patient-centered services, this study aims to examine the strengths, limitations, challenges, facilitators, and prerequisites for the implementation and utilization of electronic health records.
methodsThis study was a systematic scoping review conducted in 2023. The protocol of the Joanna Briggs Institute (2015) was employed to design and execute this scoping review, while the model by Levak et al. (2010) served as a guide for its execution. Articles were searched across six major databases, including IS Web of Sciences, PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Cochrane, and ProQuest, using a predefined search strategy. Google Scholar was also utilized for supplementary searches. The search period spanned from 2002 to 2022.
resultsA total of 37,694 studies were identified across six primary databases. Following evaluation in three stages-title, abstract, and full-text-71 articles were deemed eligible for inclusion in this scoping review. Qualitative analysis and data classification of the selected studies identified four main themes and 31 sub-themes related to the strengths of setting up and utilizing electronic health records. Challenges associated with the launch and implementation of electronic health records were categorized into five main themes and 47 sub-themes, while facilitators and prerequisites for launching and utilizing EHRs were classified into five main themes and 30 sub-themes. It should be noted that some sub-themes were reported in only a single study; therefore, their weight should be interpreted with caution. Finally, a five-stage process was recommended to guide the successful launch and implementation of EHRs.
conclusionsHealthcare managers and policymakers should comprehensively consider the strengths, limitations, challenges, facilitators, and prerequisites for launching and using electronic health records. Given the relatively limited effectiveness of government incentive policies and financial support, there is a need to assess and revise these policies to enhance the implementation of EHR. Addressing user resistance requires a greater focus on organizational culture.
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.