Correctly structured problem lists lead to better and faster clinical decision-making in electronic health records compared to non-curated problem lists: a single-blinded crossover randomized controlled trial
Open accessAbstract
Background Correctly structured problem lists in electronic health records (EHRs) offer major benefits to patient care. Without structured lists, diagnosis information is often scatteredly documented in free text, which may contribute to errors and inefficient information retrieval. This study aims to assess whether EHRs with correctly structured problem lists result in better and faster clinical decision-making compared to non-curated problem lists. Methods Two versions of two patient records (A and B) were created in an EHR training environment: one version included diagnosis information structured and coded on the problem list ("correctly structured problem list"), the other version had missing problem list diagnoses and diagnosis information partly documented in free text ("non-curated problem list"). In this single-blinded crossover randomized controlled trial, healthcare providers, who can prescribe medications, from two Dutch university medical center locations first evaluated a randomized version of patient A, then B. Participants were asked to motivate their answer to two medication prescription questions. One (test) question required information similarly presented in both record versions. The second (comparison) question required information documented on problem lists and/or in notes. The primary outcome measure was the correctness of the motivated answer to the comparison question. Secondary outcome measure was the time to answer and motivate both questions corre…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Prior studies on clinical documentation suggest that structured formats improve readability and may be perceived as higher quality.
“Prior studies on clinical documentation suggest that structured formats improve readability and may be perceived as higher quality.27,28”
From Large Language Model–Generated Electronic Consultations: A Blinded Comparative Study of OpenEvidence and Gastroenterologist Electronic Consultations (2026) · cites this paper as [28]
Cites
An overview of clinical decision support systems: Benefits, risks, and strategies for success
Sutton, R. T., Pincock, D., Baumgart, D. C., Sadowski, D. C., Fedorak, R. N., & Kroeker, K. I. (2020) · npj Digital Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41746-020-0221-y · Cited by 3,019 · see citing works
Ash, J. S. (2003) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m1471 · Cited by 1,789 · see citing works
Information technology and organizational learning: a review and assessment of research
Robey, D., Boudreau, M.-C., & Rose, G. M. (2000) · Accounting, Management and Information Technologies · doi:10.1016/s0959-8022(99)00017-x · Cited by 377 · see citing works
Moy, A. J., Schwartz, J. M., Chen, R., Sadri, S., Lucas, E., Cato, K. D., & Rossetti, S. C. (2021) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1093/jamia/ocaa325 · Cited by 284 · see citing works
Mazur, L. M., Mosaly, P. R., Moore, C., & Marks, L. (2019) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.1709 · Cited by 127 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Stephenson, C. R., Varayil, J. E., Salonen, B. R., Wight, E. C., Sang, P. D., Ghosh, A. K., Shung, D. L., Croghan, I. T., Schroeder, D. R., & Hurt, R. T. (2026) · Mayo Clinic Proceedings: Digital Health · doi:10.1016/j.mcpdig.2026.100404
- Authors
- Klappe, E. S., Heijmans, J., Groen, K., ter Schure, J., Cornet, R., & de Keizer, N. F.
- Affiliations
- Amsterdam Public Health (NL)
- Amsterdam University Medical Centers (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Klappe, Eva S.
- Venue
- International Journal of Medical Informatics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2023-12
- Volume
- 180
- Pages
- 105264
- ISSN
- 1386-5056 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4387783573
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2
- FWCI
- 3.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- International Journal of Medical Informatics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Amsterdam University Medical Centers (UMC 2019-AMC-JK-7, 22.442)
- 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
- problem list, electronic health records, clinical decision-making, structured clinical data, drug prescribing, diagnosis documentation, information retrieval, clinical decision support
- MeSH terms
- Clinical Decision-Making, Health Personnel, Humans, Drug Prescriptions, Cross-Over Studies, 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