Trial reportBMC health services research2026
Effect of pre-visit computer-assisted history-taking with a structured copy-ready summary on documentation completeness in screening for inflammatory rheumatic diseases: a randomized pilot study.
Trial report 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundClinical encounters in outpatient care are constrained by high demand, limited consultation time, and documentation requirements. Computer-assisted history-taking (CAHT) may improve the structured collection of patient information before consultations and disease screening, but evidence is limited. This randomized pilot study evaluated whether pre-visit CAHT combined with a copy-ready summary increased documentation completeness and assessed patient and physician acceptance.
methodsMAESTRI was a multicenter, parallel-group, randomized pilot study conducted across rheumatology, dermatology, and orthopedics outpatient services. Adults at increased risk of an underlying inflammatory rheumatic disease (IRD) were randomized to pre-visit CAHT or usual care. Specialty-specific questionnaires generated structured narrative summaries covering predefined screening-relevant items. The primary outcome was documentation completeness, assessed by a blinded reviewer as the percentage of these predefined items present in the final clinical documentation. Secondary and exploratory outcomes included patient and physician acceptance, usability ratings, and free-text feedback.
resultsOf 45 screened patients, 43 were randomized and analyzed. The mean age was 54.2 years (SD 14.3), and 29 participants (67.4%) were female. All intervention-group clinical notes contained the generated summary. Overall median documentation completeness was 100.0% (IQR 100.0-100.0) in the intervention group compared with 46.9% (IQR 10.0-68.8) in the control group (p < 0.001), with consistent differences across rheumatology, dermatology, and orthopedics. CAHT acceptance was high among both patients and physicians, with 41 of 43 patients (95.3%) willing to complete and the six responding physicians (100%) willing to offer digital pre-visit questionnaires before future appointments. Qualitative feedback was predominantly positive, with patients reporting that pre-visit questionnaires could improve consultation preparation, support recall of symptoms, and help physicians focus the visit on relevant issues. Some participants emphasized that digital questionnaires should complement, rather than replace, direct physician interaction.
conclusionsPre-visit CAHT combined with a structured, copy-ready summary substantially increased the completeness with which predefined screening-relevant information was transferred into clinical documentation while also suggesting high acceptance among both patients and physicians. These findings support further evaluation in a larger trial assessing workflow impact and clinical impact.
trial registrationThe study was registered at German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS; ID: DRKS00036519). Date of Registration: 2025-03-31.
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.