Literature DB >> 8846696

The paper-based patient record: is it really so bad?

H J Tange1.   

Abstract

In a recent review of literature, a committee of the American Institute of Medicine found much support of the weakness of the paper-based patient record. Inspired by these results, a local survey was held among practicing clinicians to test, whether they could subscribe the Committee's conclusions. The clinicians turned out to be far more positive about the quality of the paper-based patient record. Possible explanations for this discrepancy are discussed, as well as the question, whether the results of the Committee's review may be used as a basis for the implementation of computer-based patient records.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 8846696     DOI: 10.1016/0169-2607(95)01672-g

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Comput Methods Programs Biomed        ISSN: 0169-2607            Impact factor:   5.428


  12 in total

1.  Evaluation of a system to identify relevant patient information and its impact on clinical information retrieval.

Authors:  Q Zeng; J J Cimino
Journal:  Proc AMIA Symp       Date:  1999

2.  Monitoring adherence to evidence-based practices: a method to utilize HL7 messages from hospital information systems.

Authors:  R Konrad; B Tulu; M Lawley
Journal:  Appl Clin Inform       Date:  2013-03-20       Impact factor: 2.342

3.  Hospitexte: towards a document-based hypertextual electronic medical record.

Authors:  J Charlet; B Bachimont; V Brunie; S el Kassar; P Zweigenbaum; J F Boisvieux
Journal:  Proc AMIA Symp       Date:  1998

4.  Navigating through a document-centered electronic medical record: a mock-up based on WWW technology.

Authors:  J Bouaud; B Séroussi
Journal:  Proc AMIA Annu Fall Symp       Date:  1996

5.  Use and impact of a computer-generated patient summary worksheet for primary care.

Authors:  Adam B Wilcox; Spencer S Jones; David A Dorr; Wayne Cannon; Laurie Burns; Kelli Radican; Kent Christensen; Cherie Brunker; Ann Larsen; Scott P Narus; Sidney N Thornton; Paul D Clayton
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2005

6.  An analysis of clinical queries in an electronic health record search utility.

Authors:  Karthik Natarajan; Daniel Stein; Samat Jain; Noémie Elhadad
Journal:  Int J Med Inform       Date:  2010-04-24       Impact factor: 4.046

Review 7.  A Review of Visual Representations of Physiologic Data.

Authors:  Rishikesan Kamaleswaran; Carolyn McGregor
Journal:  JMIR Med Inform       Date:  2016-11-21

8.  Effect of a Novel Clinical Decision Support Tool on the Efficiency and Accuracy of Treatment Recommendations for Cholesterol Management.

Authors:  Marianne R Scheitel; Maya E Kessler; Jane L Shellum; Steve G Peters; Dawn S Milliner; Hongfang Liu; Ravikumar Komandur Elayavilli; Karl A Poterack; Timothy A Miksch; Jennifer Boysen; Ron A Hankey; Rajeev Chaudhry
Journal:  Appl Clin Inform       Date:  2017-02-08       Impact factor: 2.342

9.  Instant availability of patient records, but diminished availability of patient information: a multi-method study of GP's use of electronic patient records.

Authors:  Tom Christensen; Anders Grimsmo
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2008-03-28       Impact factor: 2.796

10.  Rubber stamp templates for improving clinical documentation: A paper-based, m-Health approach for quality improvement in low-resource settings.

Authors:  Bernadette Kleczka; Anita Musiega; Grace Rabut; Phoebe Wekesa; Paul Mwaniki; Michael Marx; Pratap Kumar
Journal:  Int J Med Inform       Date:  2017-10-23       Impact factor: 4.046

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.