Cited by 56Electronic Health Records SystemsMedical Coding and Health InformationNursing Diagnosis and Documentation

Structured Data Entry in the Electronic Medical Record: Perspectives of Pediatric Specialty Physicians and Surgeons

Open access
Bush, Ruth A., Kuelbs, Cynthia, Ryu, Julie, Jiang, Wen, Chiang, George·2017·Journal of Medical Systems

Abstract

The Epic electronic health record (EHR) platform supports structured data entry systems (SDES), which allow developers, with input from users, to create highly customized patient-record templates in order to maximize data completeness and to standardize structure. There are many potential advantages of using discrete data fields in the EHR to capture data for secondary analysis and epidemiological research, but direct data acquisition from clinicians remains one of the largest obstacles to leveraging the EHR for secondary use. Physician resistance to SDES is multifactorial. A 35-item questionnaire based on Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology, was used to measure attitudes, facilitation, and potential incentives for adopting SDES for clinical documentation among 25 pediatric specialty physicians and surgeons. Statistical analysis included chi-square for categorical data as well as independent sample t-tests and analysis of variance for continuous variables. Mean scores of the nine constructs demonstrated primarily positive physician attitudes toward SDES, while the surgeons were neutral. Those under 40 were more likely to respond that facilitating conditions for structured entry existed as compared to the two older age groups (p = .02). Pediatric surgeons were significantly less positive than specialty physicians about SDES effects on Performance (p = .01) and the effect of Social Influence (p = .02); but in more agreement that use of forms was voluntary (p = .0…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10916-017-0716-5

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bush, R. A., Kuelbs, C., Ryu, J., Jiang, W., & Chiang, G.
Affiliations
  • University of San Diego (US)
  • University of California San Diego (US)
  • Rady Children's Institute for Genomic Medicine (US)
Corresponding author
Bush, Ruth A.
Venue
Journal of Medical Systems
Published
2017-03-21
Volume
41
Issue
5
Pages
75-75
ISSN
  • 0148-5598 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-689X
OpenAlex
W2602583982
Cited by
56
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3
FWCI
3.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Systems (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (K99/R00 HS022404)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Medical Coding and Health Information
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Issues, ethics and legal aspects › Nursing Diagnosis and Documentation
Keywords
structured data entry, electronic health records, pediatric surgeons, UTAUT, technology acceptance, clinical documentation, data completeness, secondary use of health data, Epic EHR, facilitating conditions, social influence
MeSH terms
Pediatricians, Adult, Analysis of Variance, Attitude of Health Personnel, California, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Chi-Square Distribution, Health Care Surveys, 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