Cited by 91Electronic Health Records SystemsUsability and User Interface DesignMedical Coding and Health Information

Electronic Health Record Vendor Adherence to Usability Certification Requirements and Testing Standards

Ratwani, Raj M., Benda, Natalie C., Hettinger, A. Zachary, Fairbanks, Rollin J.·2015·JAMA

Abstract

This study uses data reported by electronic health record (EHR) vendors to the US Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology to determine whether usability certification requirements and testing standards were met.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.2015.8372

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Of 41 vendors assessed, 14 (34%) had not met the ONC certification requirement of stating their user-centered design process.

    “Of 41 vendors assessed, 14 (34%) had not met the ONC certification requirement of stating their user-centered design process (ONC is short for the US Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology).”
  • A previous study demonstrated that many EHR vendors did not follow basic usability principles.

    “However, a previous study demonstrated that many EHR vendors did not follow basic usability principles.129”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ratwani, R. M., Benda, N. C., Hettinger, A. Z., & Fairbanks, R. J.
Affiliations
MedStar Health (US)
Venue
JAMA
Published
2015-09-08
Volume
314
Issue
10
Pages
1070
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2115538514
Cited by
91
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 7
FWCI
26.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • JAMA (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Medical Coding and Health Information
Keywords
electronic health records, EHR vendors, Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, health information technology adoption, certification compliance
MeSH terms
Certification, Commerce, United States, United States Dept. of Health and Human Services, Guideline Adherence, Electronic Health Records

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review