Unmet information needs of clinical teams delivering care to complex patients and design strategies to address those needs
Open accessAbstract
Objectives: To identify the unmet information needs of clinical teams delivering care to patients with complex medical, social, and economic needs; and to propose principles for redesigning electronic health records (EHR) to address these needs. Materials and Methods: In this observational study, we interviewed and observed care teams in 9 community health centers in Oregon and Washington to understand their use of the EHR when caring for patients with complex medical and socioeconomic needs. Data were analyzed using a comparative approach to identify EHR users’ information needs, which were then used to produce EHR design principles. Results: Analyses of > 300 hours of observations and 51 interviews identified 4 major categories of information needs related to: consistency of social determinants of health (SDH) documentation; SDH information prioritization and changes to this prioritization; initiation and follow-up of community resource referrals; and timely communication of SDH information. Within these categories were 10 unmet information needs to be addressed by EHR designers. We propose the following EHR design principles to address these needs: enhance the flexibility of EHR documentation workflows; expand the ability to exchange information within teams and between systems; balance innovation and standardization of health information technology systems; organize and simplify information displays; and prioritize and reduce information. Conclusion: Developing EHR tools that are simple, accessible, easy to use, and able to be updated by a range of professionals is critical. The identified information needs and design principles should inform developers and implementers working in community health centers and other settings where complex patients receive care.
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?
Simply adding dedicated SDOH fields and tools to EHRs is insufficient to drive increased documentation of social needs.
“This suggests that simply adding dedicated SDOH fields and tools to EHRs is insufficient to drive increased documentation of social needs, a conclusion consistent with other publications.13,21”
From Documentation and review of social determinants of health data in the EHR: measures and associated insights (2021) · cites this paper as [21]
Cites
Koppel, R., Wetterneck, T., Telles, J. L., & Karsh, B.-T. (2008) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m2616 · Cited by 685 · see citing works
Health information technology: fallacies and sober realities
Karsh, B.-T., Weinger, M. B., Abbott, P. A., & Wears, R. L. (2010) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1136/jamia.2010.005637 · Cited by 365 · see citing works
Gold, R., Cottrell, E., Bunce, A., Middendorf, M., Hollombe, C., Cowburn, S., Mahr, P., & Melgar, G. (2017) · The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine · doi:10.3122/jabfm.2017.04.170046 · Cited by 215 · see citing works
Self-citationKasthurirathne, S. N., Vest, J. R., Menachemi, N., Halverson, P. K., & Grannis, S. J. (2018) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1093/jamia/ocx130 · Cited by 71 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Wang, M., Pantell, M. S., Gottlieb, L. M., & Adler-Milstein, J. (2021) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1093/jamia/ocab194 · Cited by 107 · see citing works
- Authors
- Cohen, D. J., Wyte-Lake, T., Dorr, D. A., Gold, R., Holden, R. J., Koopman, R. J., Colasurdo, J., & Warren, N.
- Affiliations
- Oregon Health & Science University (US)
- Department of Family Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA
- Kaiser Permanente (US)
- Indiana University School of Medicine (US)
- University of Missouri (US)
- Ochin (US)
- Corresponding author
- Cohen, Deborah J
- Venue
- Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2020-03-05
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 690-699
- ISSN
- 1067-5027 (ISSN-L)
- 1527-974X
- PMC
- PMC7647291
- OpenAlex
- W3009393261
- Cited by
- 20
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 2
- FWCI
- 2.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Licence
- academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model (vor)
- Locations
- Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- IUScholarWorks (Indiana University) (submittedVersion)
- Purdue University Indianapolis (Indiana University) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (1R01HS023324-01A1)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Issues, ethics and legal aspects › Nursing Diagnosis and Documentation
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Medical Coding and Health Information
- Keywords
- unmet information needs, social determinants of health, complex patients, community health centers, care team communication, community resource referral, health information exchange, data prioritization, socio-economic needs
- MeSH terms
- Community Health Centers, Documentation, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Patient Care Team, Primary Health Care, Referral and Consultation, Clinical Medicine, Workflow, Electronic Health Records, Social Determinants of Health
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