ArticleJAMIA open2026
Evaluating the impact of artificial intelligence scribes on clinical documentation in primary care: a simulation study.
Article in JAMIA open, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To investigate the performance of artificial intelligence (AI) scribes and their impact on clinical documentation time. Materials and Methods: Artificial intelligence scribes were assessed using clinical simulations with 9 primary care physicians, each conducting 4 simulated encounters with standardized patients with and without the use of an AI scribe. Clinical simulations were audio and video recorded, and videos were coded for documentation behaviors using a designed coding scheme. Results: Clinical documentation accounts for 36.3% of the simulated clinical encounter without the use of the AI scribe, whereas primary care physicians spend 11.2% of the simulated encounter on clinical documentation when using an AI scribe. The use of AI scribes accounts for a 69.1% reduction in documentation time. Discussion: Clinical simulations offered a controlled and realistic environment to assess the impact of AI scribes on primary care physicians' workflows, demonstrating their potential to reduce documentation time. Conclusion: Artificial intelligence scribes demonstrate potential to alleviate the burden of clinical documentation, addressing a critical factor contributing to physician burnout. Further research is needed to understand the impact of AI scribes in real-life clinical settings across complex patient scenarios.
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.