Cited by 140Electronic Health Records SystemsHealthcare Policy and ManagementMedical Coding and Health Information

Implications of an emerging EHR monoculture for hospitals and healthcare systems

Open access
Koppel, Ross, Lehmann, Christoph U·2015·Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association

Abstract

In many hospitals and health systems, a ‘new’ electronic health record means a shift to one vendor: Epic, a vendor that dominates in large and medium hospital markets and continues its success with smaller institutions and ambulatory practices. Our paper examines the implications of this emerging monoculture: its advantages and disadvantages for physicians and hospitals and its role in innovation, professional autonomy, implementation difficulties, workflow, flexibility, cost, data standards, interoperability, and interactions with other information technology (IT) systems.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/amiajnl-2014-003023

Cites

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?

  • There are concerns that the large market shares of relatively few EHR vendors may make vendors less responsive to designing EHRs to meet patients' and clinicians' needs, particularly while controlling costs and promoting interoperability.

    “While health care systems may influence the development of EHR features, there are concerns that the large market shares of relatively few EHR vendors may make vendors less responsive to designing EHRs to meet patients’ and clinicians’ needs, particularly while controlling costs and promoting interoperability [22].”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Koppel, R., & Lehmann, C. U.
Affiliations
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • Vanderbilt University (US)
Venue
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
Published
2014-10-23
Volume
22
Issue
2
Pages
465-471
ISSN
  • 1067-5027 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-974X
OpenAlex
W2155767215
Cited by
140
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 14
FWCI
28.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Healthcare Policy and Management
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Medical Coding and Health Information
Keywords
electronic health records, epic, market concentration, hospital information systems, interoperability, data standards, implementation barriers, physician workflow, professional autonomy
MeSH terms
Commerce, Delivery of Health Care, Health Facilities, Hospitals, United States, Medical Records Systems, Computerized, Systems Integration, 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