The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 20 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
When Conversation Is Better Than Computation
Open accessAbstract
While largely ignored in informatics thinking, the clinical communication space accounts for the major part of the information flow in health care. Growing evidence indicates that errors in communication give rise to substantial clinical morbidity and mortality. This paper explores the implications of acknowledging the primacy of the communication space in informatics and explores some solutions to communication difficulties. It also examines whether understanding the dynamics of communication between human beings can also improve the way we design information systems in health care. Using the concept of common ground in conversation, proposals are suggested for modeling the common ground between a system and human users. Such models provide insights into when communication or computational systems are better suited to solving information problems.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Rogers, E. M., Singhal, A., & Quinlan, M. M. (2019) · An Integrated Approach to Communication Theory and Research · doi:10.4324/9780203710753-35 · Cited by 37,322
Clark, H. H., & Brennan, S. E. (1991) · Perspectives on socially shared cognition. · doi:10.1037/10096-006 · Cited by 4,555
Perspectives on socially shared cognition.
(1991) · American Psychological Association eBooks · doi:10.1037/10096-000 · Cited by 3,446
The Quality in Australian Health Care Study
Wilson, R. M., Runciman, W. B., Gibberd, R. W., Harrison, B. T., Newby, L., & Hamilton, J. D. (1995) · Medical Journal of Australia · doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.1995.tb124691.x · Cited by 2,384
Freedom and Control in Modern Society.
Dahl, R. A., Berger, M., Abel, T., & Page, C. H. (1954) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2087947 · Cited by 1,361
Electronic Mail as the Medium of Managerial Choice
Markus, M. L. (1994) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.5.4.502 · Cited by 1,073
Information Needs in Office Practice: Are They Being Met?
COVELL, D. G., UMAN, G. C., & MANNING, P. R. (1985) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-103-4-596 · Cited by 854
Communication behaviours in a hospital setting: an observational study
Coiera, E., & Tombs, V. (1998) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.316.7132.673 · Cited by 492
Self-citationRationalizing Medical Work: Decision-Support Techniques and Medical Practices
Zussman, R., & Berg, M. (1998) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2654540 · Cited by 469
Methods of Information in Medicine
(1988) · Methods of Information in Medicine · doi:10.1055/s-0038-1636640 · Cited by 238
Cited by
Fick, D. M., Cooper, J. W., Wade, W. E., Waller, J. L., Maclean, J. R., & Beers, M. H. (2003) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinte.163.22.2716 · Cited by 2,389
Ash, J. S. (2003) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m1471 · Cited by 1,789
Residents’ and Attending Physicians’ Handoffs: A Systematic Review of the Literature
Riesenberg, L. A., Leitzsch, J., Massucci, J. L., Jaeger, J., Rosenfeld, J. C., Patow, C., Padmore, J. S., & Karpovich, K. P. (2009) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0b013e3181bf51a6 · Cited by 345
Westbrook, J. I., Raban, M. Z., Walter, S. R., & Douglas, H. (2018) · BMJ Quality & Safety · doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2017-007333 · Cited by 317
Beyond TAM and UTAUT: Future directions for HIT implementation research
Shachak, A., Kuziemsky, C., & Petersen, C. (2019) · Journal of Biomedical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2019.103315 · Cited by 263
Metadata
- Authors
- Coiera, E.
- Venue
- Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2000-05-01
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 277-286
- ISSN
- 1067-5027 (ISSN-L)
- 1527-974X
- OpenAlex
- W1549389909
- Cited by
- 444
- References
- 20
- FWCI
- 51.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: When Conversation Is Better Than Computation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/jamia.2000.0070277
- The paper
- Coiera, E. (2000). When Conversation Is Better Than Computation. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. https://doi.org/10.1136/jamia.2000.0070277
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
