ArticleFuture healthcare journal2026
Digital solutions in acute medicine: Will electronic health records join up the patient journey (soon?).
Article in Future healthcare journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Right care, right place, right now: The role of acute medicine in urgent and emergency care.Future healthcare journal · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Acute medicine provides care to patients during the first 72 h of their hospital stay. Clinicians face unique challenges of complexity in having to care simultaneously for groups of patients with multiple medical conditions and often complex needs. Digital innovation is central to modern clinical practice, yet its capacity to improve quality of care remains contested. This narrative review explores what acute physicians require from electronic health record (EHR) systems, drawing on evidence from usability studies, implementation evaluations and quality frameworks. Despite substantial investment, evidence of benefits for clinical outcomes, cost-effectiveness and user satisfaction remains modest. There is limited research on impact on mortality, efficiency and patient experience. Most research demonstrates inconsistent effects on process and intermediate outcomes such as clinical documentation quality (legibility) or improvements in medication safety. Poor system design based on work as described/imagined, rather than work as actually done, contributes to clinician burnout and undermines system adoption. Despite this, the review identifies good practice examples that show the potential for transformation in this challenging area of medical care. Future progress depends on integrating human factors science, rigorous usability assessment and responsive design. Research will need to evidence equity and sustainability. Acute physicians should 'expect more': systems that provide the right information, in the right context, at the right time - first time.
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.