Cited by 188Electronic Health Records SystemsClinical Reasoning and Diagnostic SkillsTechnology and Human Factors in Education and Health

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 49 of the 51 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 19 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Primary Care Physicians’ Use of an Electronic Medical Record System: A Cognitive Task Analysis

Open access
Shachak, Aviv, Hadas-Dayagi, Michal, Ziv, Amitai, Reis, Shmuel·2009·Journal of General Internal Medicine

Abstract

Objective To describe physicians' patterns of using an Electronic Medical Record (EMR) system; to reveal the underlying cognitive elements involved in EMR use, possible resulting errors, and influences on patient-doctor communication; to gain insight into the role of expertise in incorporating EMRs into clinical practice in general and communicative behavior in particular.Design Cognitive task analysis using semi-structured interviews and field observations.Participants Twenty-five primary care physicians from the northern district of the largest health maintenance organization (HMO) in Israel.Results The comprehensiveness, organization, and readability of data in the EMR system reduced physicians' need to recall information from memory and the difficulty of reading handwriting. Physicians perceived EMR use as reducing the cognitive load associated with clinical tasks. Automaticity of EMR use contributed to efficiency, but sometimes resulted in errors, such as the selection of incorrect medication or the input of data into the wrong patient's chart. EMR use interfered with patient-doctor communication. The main strategy for overcoming this problem involved separating EMR use from time spent communicating with patients. Computer mastery and enhanced physicians' communication skills also helped.Conclusions There is a fine balance between the benefits and risks of EMR use. Automaticity, especially in combination with interruptions, emerged as the main cognitive factor contributing to errors. EMR use had a negative influence on communication, a problem that can be partially addressed by improving the spatial organization of physicians' offices and by enhancing physicians' computer and communication skills.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11606-008-0892-6

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

59 Own result · 11 Not checked yet · 11 Own interpretation · 2 Own method · 1 No basis given

Verify all 19 references — free account

Show all 49 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 25
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 18
35 of 35
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    In Israel, physicians must provide patients with printed prescriptions by hand, even when the prescription is generated electronically.

    “in Israel, paper prescriptions are mandatory even when generated by an EMR system”
    “Israeli law requires primary care physicians to print and physically hand prescriptions to their patients.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Few requirements exist for high usability standards.

    “Generally, however, there are few requirements for high usability standards”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Currently, EMR implementation and training tend to emphasize technical features like system functionality and capabilities.

    “To date, EMR implementation and training usually focus on technological aspects, such as the functionality and capabilities of systems”
3 of 3

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

1 of 1

Citations

Cites

Show all 51 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Shachak, A., Hadas-Dayagi, M., Ziv, A., & Reis, S.
Affiliations
  • Technion – Israel Institute of Technology (IL)
  • Sheba Medical Center (IL)
Corresponding author
Shachak, Aviv
Venue
Journal of General Internal Medicine
Published
2009-01-07
Volume
24
Issue
3
Pages
341-348
ISSN
  • 0884-8734 (ISSN-L)
  • 1525-1497
OpenAlex
W2007554419
Cited by
188
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 4
FWCI
21.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of General Internal Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Technology and Human Factors in Education and Health
Keywords
electronic health records, primary care physicians, cognitive task analysis, cognitive load, patient-doctor communication, medical errors, automaticity, interruptions, computer skills, physician expertise, health maintenance organizations
MeSH terms
Attitude to Computers, Female, Health Maintenance Organizations, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Israel, Male, Physician-Patient Relations, Physicians, Family, Professional Competence, Task Performance and Analysis, Cohort Studies, Medical Records Systems, Computerized

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-06, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-06 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

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