The DOI matches its Crossref record; 112 of the 116 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 54 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Health information technology: fallacies and sober realities
Open accessAbstract
Current research suggests that the rate of adoption of health information technology (HIT) is low, and that HIT may not have the touted beneficial effects on quality of care or costs. The twin issues of the failure of HIT adoption and of HIT efficacy stem primarily from a series of fallacies about HIT. We discuss 12 HIT fallacies and their implications for design and implementation. These fallacies must be understood and addressed for HIT to yield better results. Foundational cognitive and human factors engineering research and development are essential to better inform HIT development, deployment, and use.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
51 Not checked yet · 39 Own interpretation · 6 No basis given
In the paper
“Have programming errors and bugs;”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites 16 18 28 35 e 39
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Be dependent on unreliable hardware or software platforms;”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites 16 18 28 35 e 39
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Current research demonstrates that health information technology (HIT) can improve patient safety and healthcare quality, in certain circumstances. 1 e 6”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites 1 e 6
boostedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“which is supported by strong theory and evidence from safety science, industrial and systems engineering, and social psychology. 62 64 65”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites 62 64 65
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we argue that the twin issues of the failure of HIT adoption and of HIT efficacy can be understood by examining a series of misguided beliefs about HIT.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The fallacies described in the paper are widely held by HIT designers and policymakers.
In the paper
“Work well in one context or organization but be unsafe or even fail in another;”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites 16 18 28 35 e 39
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“HIT systems tend to have a ' magnifying ' property, wherein one exchanges a large number of small failures for a small number of large, potentially catastrophic failures.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“because HIT is designed, built, and implemented by humans, it will invariably have ' bugs ' and latent failure modes. 21 22”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites 21 22
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Currently, there are no regulatory requirements to evaluate HIT system safety even though these systems are known to directly affect patient care in both positive and negative ways. 2 17 18 27 e 34”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites 2 17 18 27 e 34
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Have been developed from erroneous or incomplete design specifications;”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites 16 18 28 35 e 39
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 28
- Probably not a substantial claim. 21
In the paper
“Equating HIT usage with design success can be misleading and may promulgate inappropriate policies to improve ' use ' . 67”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [67] source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: unclear — It is unclear whether it could be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“current efforts aimed at the nationwide deployment of health care ITwill not be sufficient to achieve the vision of 21st-century health care, and may even set back the cause if these efforts continue wholly without change from their present course.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [14] Stead WW Lin HS , eds. Computational Technology for Effective Health Care: Immediate Steps and Strategic Directions. Washington DC: National Academies Press, 2009.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Currently, there are no regulatory requirements to evaluate HIT system safety even though these systems are known to directly affect patient care in both positive and negative ways. 2 17 18 27 e 34”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites 2 17 18 27 e 34
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“changing the order of medication options on a drop down pick list will influence clinicians ' ordering behavior.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“A passive monitoring approach, as currently suggested by the Office of the National Coordinator, 49 seems likely to be both expensive and ultimately ineffective.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [49] Egerman P Probst M . Memorandum to David Blumenthal: Adoption-Certification Workgroup HIT Safety Recommendations. http://healthit.hhs.gov/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS_0_11673_911847_0_0_18/AdoptionCertificationLetterHITSafetyFINAL508.pdf (accessed 17 Aug 2010).
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The current passive monitoring approach suggested by the Office of the National Coordinator is likely to be expensive and ineffective.
In the paper
“Change how clinicians do their daily work, thus introducing new potential failure modes. 16 18 28 35 e 39”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites 16 18 28 35 e 39
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“or reduce costs. 13”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [13] source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“human factors engineers, social psychologists, and patient safety researchers long ago debunked the bad apple theory of human error, replacing it with the more accurate and useful systems view of error, 21 62 63”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites 21 62 63
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The complexity of HIT systems and the risk of potentiating serious error is sufficiently significant to demand effective regulatory oversight. 46”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [46] Hoffman S Podgurski A . Finding a cure: the case for regulation and oversight of electronic health record systems. Harv J Law Technol 2008;22:104–65.
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This mismatch between who benefits and who pays leads to incomplete or inaccurate data entry ( ' garbage in d garbage out ' ), inefficiency, workarounds, and poor adoption. 74”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [74] Abbott P Coenan A . Globalization and advances in information and communication technologies: The impact on nursing and health. Nurs Outlook 2008;58:238–46. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Many catastrophes in complex sociotechnical systems (eg, Three Mile Island) occur in such situations, particularly when the technology does not communicate effectively with its human users.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“computers are very good at repeatedly doing whatever they were told to do, just like a well-trained animal (ie, ' sitstay ' ). Computers implement human-derived rules and with a degree of consistency much higher than human workers.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Otherwise, unintended consequences, such as physicians and hospitals investing in HIT to the exclusion of what might actually be more effective local strategies (eg, use of nurse case managers or process redesign), may occur.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Healthcare is a complex sociotechnical system where simple metrics can mislead because they do not adequately consider the context of human decisions at the time they are made.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: unclear — It is unclear whether it could be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“computers are much more likely than humans to perform their clever and complex tricks at inappropriate times.”
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Computers cannot be described as being inherently ' smart ' .”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
In the paper
“As a result, problems have been framed too narrowly, leading to impoverished designs and disappointing ' solutions ' . 85”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [85] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: unclear — It is unclear whether it could be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“computer displays are not yet as portable, flexible, or well-designed as paper. 83”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [83] Sellen AJ Harper RHR . The Myth of the Paperless Office. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2002. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“People, on the other hand, are smart, creative, and context sensitive. 79”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [79] Norman DA . Things That Make Us Smart: Defending Human Attributes In The Age Of The Machine. New York: Basic Books, 1994.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the promulgation of ' meaningful use ' may lead to undesirable consequences if such use is not contextually grounded and tied to improved efficiency, learning, ease of use, task and information flow, cognitive load, situation awareness, clinician and patient satisfaction, reduced errors, and faster error recovery.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
In the paper
“The 'fi eld of dreams ' fallacy is well-known in other domains where it is also referred to as the ' designer fallacy ' or ' designercentered design ' . 77”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [77] Hoffman RR Militello LG . Perspectives on Cognitive Task Analysis. New York: Taylor and Francis, 2009. source
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“User-created paper artifacts typically support patientspecific cognition, situational awareness, task and information communication, and coordination, all essential to safe quality patient care.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“most clinicians are not experts in device design, user interface design, or the relationship between HIT design and performance.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The paper forms are not simple data repositories that, once computerized, could be eliminated. Rather such ' scraps ' of paper are sophisticated cognitive artifacts that support memory, forecasting and planning, communication, coordination, and education.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Paper will persist, and should persist, if HIT is not able to provide similar support.”
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“By seeing only what they know, such teams do not understand how clinical work is really carried out, what clinicians ' real needs are, and where the potential hazards and leverage points lie.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“some clinical decision support (CDS) rules force clinicians to stop and respond to the CDS, interrupting their work, substituting the designer ' s judgment for that of the clinician. 71”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [71] Bisantz AM Wears RL . Forcing functions: the need for restraint. Ann Emerg Med 2008;53:477–9. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“it is misguided to believe that healthcare is unique or that no one outside of the domain could possibly understand it.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“it takes special training and skills to evaluate a human e computer interface, assess the usability of a system, or predict the changes in communication patterns and social structures that a design might induce.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“a lack of use is not evidence of a flawed system d clinicians may ignore features like reminders for legitimate reasons.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: unclear — It is unclear whether it could be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Technology can be at its worst, and humans at their best, when novel and complex situations arise.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: unclear — It is unclear whether it could be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Validation of HITcannot be achieved by asking a clinician if they like the design. Validation requires thorough experimental testing of the design based on well-defined performance criteria.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, use may not truly be meaningful in a clinical sense until HIT truly supports users ' needs.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While it may not take 60 years for HIT to become as safe, if we do not change from our current course, it never will be.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Commercial aviation has become very safe in the more than 60 years since Fitts' publication.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These challenges will only be overcome by collaborating substantively with those who can contribute unique and important expertise such as human factors engineers, applied psychologists, medical sociologists, communication scientists, cognitive scientists, and interaction designers.”
- Also stated in: § WHAT SHOULD WE DO NOW? · p. 5 · plain
“HIT stands to benefit in the same way.”
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Rests on an assumption: Pilots and nuclear power operators did not improve safety on their own; they worked closely with experts in cognitive, social, and physical performance and safety.
- Also stated in: § WHAT SHOULD WE DO NOW? · p. 5 · plain
In the paper
“Exemplary research on relevant topics has been carried out for several decades, 89 e 98 but it does not seem that commercial HIT has benefited adequately from these findings.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites 89 e 98
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“HITaffords real opportunities for improving quality and safety. However, at the same time, it creates substantial challenges, especially during everyday clinical work.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These steps alone will require a significant investment by vendors, healthcare organizations, and government funders.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Current meaningful use rules and deadlines leave little time for HIT product improvement and testing, incentivizing rapid implementation of whatever is available”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
The fallacies described in the paper are widely held by HIT designers and policymakers.
“Many designers and policymakers believe that the risks of HIT are minor and easily manageable.”
The paper relies on this without support.
No other hazardous industry deploys safety critical IT without some form of independent hazard analysis.
“No other hazardous industry deploys safety critical IT without some form of independent hazard analysis (eg, a ' safety case ' ); it is unwise for healthcare to continue to do so.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The current passive monitoring approach suggested by the Office of the National Coordinator is likely to be expensive and ineffective.
“A passive monitoring approach, as currently suggested by the Office of the National Coordinator, 49 seems likely to be both expensive and ultimately ineffective.”
The paper relies on this without support.
There are fundamental gaps in awareness, recognition, and application of existing scientific knowledge, especially in human factors, systems engineering, and cognitive engineering, that could help solve some of HIT's biggest problems.
“There are fundamental gaps in the awareness, recognition, and application of existing scientific knowledge bases, especially related to human factors, and systems and cognitive engineering, that could help address some of HIT ' s biggest problems.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Pilots and nuclear power operators did not improve safety on their own; they worked closely with experts in cognitive, social, and physical performance and safety.
“Pilots did not improve aviation safety nor did nuclear power operators improve nuclear safety . by themselves. Rather they worked closely with experts in cognitive, social, and physical performance and safety to improve safety.”
The paper relies on this without support.
People have very limited insight into their own performance and even less ability to explain what might improve it.
“Humans have very limited insight into their own performance, and even more limited ability to articulate what might improve it.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Commercial aviation has become very safe in the more than 60 years since Fitts' publication.
“In the more than 60 years since that publication, commercial aviation has become very safe.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Throughout human history, major innovations have always brought new perils.
“Throughout human history, significant innovations have always been associated with new perils.”
The paper relies on this without support.
HIT works best and is safest when customized to local circumstances and workflows.
“Despite compelling evidence that HITworks best (and is safest) when it is customized to local circumstances and workflows”
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?
In the citing paper
“However, emerging evidence suggests that HIT may cause new patient safety concerns and other unintended consequences due to usability issues, disruptions of clinical processes, and unsafe workarounds to circumvent technology-related constraints.2–16”
From An analysis of electronic health record-related patient safety concerns (2014) · cites this paper as [11]
Citations
Cites
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.185.4157.1124 · Cited by 28,810
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1975) · Utility, Probability, and Human Decision Making · doi:10.1007/978-94-010-1834-0_8 · Cited by 22,650
(1993) · Cited by 9,879
Reason, J. (1990) · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139062367 · Cited by 5,108
Managing the Risks of Organizational Accidents
REASON, J. T. (2016) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315543543 · Cited by 4,523
Chaudhry, B., Wang, J., Wu, S., Maglione, M., Mojica, W., Roth, E., Morton, S. C., & Shekelle, P. G. (2006) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-144-10-200605160-00125 · Cited by 3,159
Garg, A. X., Adhikari, N. K. J., McDonald, H., Rosas-Arellano, M. P., Devereaux, P. J., Beyene, J., Sam, J., & Haynes, R. B. (2005) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.293.10.1223 · Cited by 2,936
Kawamoto, K., Houlihan, C. A., Balas, E. A., & Lobach, D. F. (2005) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.38398.500764.8f · Cited by 2,703
Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion
Cialdini, R. B. (1993) · Cited by 2,563
Role of Computerized Physician Order Entry Systems in Facilitating Medication Errors
Koppel, R. (2005) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.293.10.1197 · Cited by 2,126
Bates, D. W. (1998) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.280.15.1311 · Cited by 2,107
Work system design for patient safety: the SEIPS model
Carayon, P., Schoofs Hundt, A., Karsh, B.-T., Gurses, A. P., Alvarado, C. J., Smith, M., & Flatley Brennan, P. (2006) · Quality in Health Care · doi:10.1136/qshc.2005.015842 · Cited by 1,795 · cited 1×
“Because information presentation profoundly affects user behavior and decision-making, it is critical that information displays be thoughtfully designed and rigorously tested to ensure they yield the best possible performance outcomes. These evaluations must consider the full complexity of the context in which the sys…”
BackgroundSelf-citationAsh, J. S. (2003) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m1471 · Cited by 1,789
Safeware: System Safety and Computers
Leveson, N. G. (1995) · CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) · Cited by 1,688
Cognitive Work Analysis: Toward Safe, Productive, and Healthy Computer-Based Work
Vicente, K. J. (1999) · Cited by 1,686
Computer-supported cooperative work: history and focus
Grudin, J. (1994) · Computer · doi:10.1109/2.291294 · Cited by 1,639
Things That Make Us Smart: Defending Human Attributes in the Age of the Machine
Robinson, R., & Norman, D. (1994) · Design Issues · doi:10.2307/1511661 · Cited by 1,528
Use of Electronic Health Records in U.S. Hospitals
Jha, A. K., DesRoches, C. M., Campbell, E. G., Donelan, K., Rao, S. R., Ferris, T. G., Shields, A., Rosenbaum, S., & Blumenthal, D. (2009) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa0900592 · Cited by 1,473
Representations in Distributed Cognitive Tasks
Zhang, J., & Norman, D. A. (1994) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1207/s15516709cog1801_3 · Cited by 1,203 · cited 1×
“55 56 The clinician does not act or decide in a vacuum, but is necessarily in fl uenced by the HIT.”
BackgroundElectronic health records in ambulatory care—a national survey of physicians
DesRoches, C. M., Campbell, E. G., Rao, S. R., Donelan, K., Ferris, T. G., Jha, A., Kaushal, R., Levy, D. E., Rosenbaum, S., Shields, A. E., et al. (2008) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa0802005 · Cited by 1,111
International Standards Organization
Guston, D. H. (2010) · Sage eBooks · doi:10.4135/9781412972093.n191 · Cited by 1,069
Reducing the Frequency of Errors in Medicine Using Information Technology
Bates, D. W., Cohen, M., Leape, L. L., Overhage, J. M., Shabot, M. M., & Sheridan, T. (2001) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1136/jamia.2001.0080299 · Cited by 959
NIELSEN, J. (1993) · Usability Engineering · doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-052029-2.50009-7 · Cited by 934
(2000) · Psychology Press eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781410605795 · Cited by 933
A Guide To Task Analysis: The Task Analysis Working Group
Kirwan, B., & Ainsworth, L. (1992) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 919
The Myth of the Paperless Office
Sellen, A. J., & Harper, R. H. R. (2001) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/4833.001.0001 · Cited by 902
Joint Cognitive Systems: Foundations of Cognitive Systems Engineering
Hollnagel, E., & Woods, D. D. (2005) · Thammasat University Digital Collections · Cited by 732
Joint Cognitive Systems: Foundations of Cognitive Systems Engineering
Hollnagel, E., & Woods, D. D. (2005) · doi:10.1201/9781420038194 · Cited by 695
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
Self-citationKirwan, B., & Ainsworth, L. K. (1992) · CRC Press eBooks · doi:10.1201/b16826 · Cited by 677
Effect of Bar-Code Technology on the Safety of Medication Administration
Poon, E. G., Keohane, C. A., Yoon, C. S., Ditmore, M., Bane, A., Levtzion‐Korach, O., Moniz, T. T., Rothschild, J. M., Kachalia, A. B., Hayes, J., et al. (2010) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa0907115 · Cited by 622
The Handbook of Task Analysis for Human-Computer Interaction
(2003) · CRC Press eBooks · doi:10.1201/b12470 · Cited by 611
Safety-critical computer systems
Storey, N. (1996) · International Linear Collider · Cited by 605
Grand challenges in clinical decision support
Sittig, D. F., Wright, A., Osheroff, J. A., Middleton, B., Teich, J. M., Ash, J. S., Campbell, E., & Bates, D. W. (2008) · Journal of Biomedical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2007.09.003 · Cited by 582
GREENHALGH, T., POTTS, H. W. W., WONG, G., BARK, P., & SWINGLEHURST, D. (2009) · The Milbank Quarterly · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0009.2009.00578.x · Cited by 541
Electronic Health Record Use and the Quality of Ambulatory Care in the United States
Linder, J. A., Ma, J., Bates, D. W., Middleton, B., & Stafford, R. S. (2007) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinte.167.13.1400 · Cited by 438
Beyond usability: Designing effective technology implementation systems to promote patient safety
Karsh, B.-T. (2004) · Quality and Safety in Health Care · doi:10.1136/qshc.2004.010322 · Cited by 414
Self-citationKaplan, B. (2001) · International Journal of Medical Informatics · doi:10.1016/s1386-5056(01)00184-8 · Cited by 380
Karsh, B.-T., Holden, R. J., Alper, S. J., & Or, C. K. L. (2006) · Quality in Health Care · doi:10.1136/qshc.2005.015974 · Cited by 372
Self-citationPatterson, E. S., Cook, R. I., & Render, M. L. (2002) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m1061 · Cited by 370
High Rates of Adverse Drug Events in a Highly Computerized Hospital
(2005) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinte.165.10.1111 · Cited by 363
Mekhjian, H. S., Kumar, R. R., Kuehn, L. A., Bentley, T. D., Teater, P., Thomas, A., Payne, B. P., & Ahmad, A. (2002) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m1038 · Cited by 357
A systems approach to organizational error
REASON, J. (1995) · Ergonomics · doi:10.1080/00140139508925221 · Cited by 340
Understanding the Complexity of Registered Nurse Work in Acute Care Settings
Ebright, P. R., Patterson, E. S., Chalko, B. A., & Render, M. L. (2003) · JONA The Journal of Nursing Administration · doi:10.1097/00005110-200312000-00004 · Cited by 321
Computational Technology for Effective Health Care
National Research Council (2009) · National Academies Press eBooks · doi:10.17226/12572 · Cited by 290
King, W. J., Paice, N., Rangrej, J., Forestell, G. J., & Swartz, R. (2003) · Pediatrics · doi:10.1542/peds.112.3.506 · Cited by 281
Categorizing the unintended sociotechnical consequences of computerized provider order entry
Ash, J. S., Sittig, D. F., Dykstra, R. H., Guappone, K., Carpenter, J. D., & Seshadri, V. (2007) · International Journal of Medical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2006.05.017 · Cited by 267
Kushniruk, A. W. (2002) · Computers in Biology and Medicine · doi:10.1016/s0010-4825(02)00011-2 · Cited by 241
A cognitive taxonomy of medical errors
Zhang, J., Patel, V. L., Johnson, T. R., & Shortliffe, E. H. (2004) · Journal of Biomedical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2004.04.004 · Cited by 234
Hospital Computing and the Costs and Quality of Care: A National Study
Himmelstein, D. U., Wright, A., & Woolhandler, S. (2010) · The American Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.amjmed.2009.09.004 · Cited by 212
Ash, J. S., Sittig, D. F., Dykstra, R. H., Campbell, E., & Guappone, K. P. (2008) · International Journal of Medical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2008.07.015 · Cited by 211
Evaluation of Outpatient Computerized Physician Medication Order Entry Systems: A Systematic Review
Eslami, S., Abu-Hanna, A., & de Keizer, N. F. (2007) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m2238 · Cited by 200
When Users Want What's not Best for Them
Andre, A. D., & Wickens, C. D. (1995) · Ergonomics in Design: The Quarterly of Human Factors Applications · doi:10.1177/106480469500300403 · Cited by 194
The Relationship between Electronic Health Record Use and Quality of Care over Time
Zhou, L., Soran, C. S., Jenter, C. A., Volk, L. A., Orav, E. J., Bates, D. W., & Simon, S. R. (2009) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m3128 · Cited by 194
Devine, E. B., Hansen, R. N., Wilson‐Norton, J. L., Lawless, N. M., Fisk, A. W., Blough, D. K., Martin, D. P., & Sullivan, S. D. (2010) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m3285 · Cited by 181
Kushniruk, A. W., Patel, V. L., & Cimino, J. J. (1997) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · Cited by 173
Buckhout, R. (1974) · Scientific American · doi:10.1038/scientificamerican1274-23 · Cited by 170
Holden, R. J. (2010) · International Journal of Medical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2009.12.003 · Cited by 168
Describing and Modeling Workflow and Information Flow in Chronic Disease Care
Unertl, K. M., Weinger, M. B., Johnson, K. B., & Lorenzi, N. M. (2009) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m3000 · Cited by 147
Self-citationImpact of CPOE on doctor–nurse cooperation for the medication ordering and administration process
Beuscart-Zéphir, M. C., Sylvia Pelayo, A., Anceaux, F., Meaux, J.-J., Degroisse, M., & Patrice Degoulet, A. (2005) · International Journal of Medical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2005.01.004 · Cited by 147
Exploring the persistence of paper with the electronic health record
Saleem, J. J., Russ, A. L., Justice, C. F., Hagg, H., Ebright, P. R., Woodbridge, P. A., & Doebbeling, B. N. (2009) · International Journal of Medical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2009.04.001 · Cited by 145
Handbook of Human Factors in Medical Device Design
Weinger, M. B., Wiklund, M. E., & Gardner-Bonneau, D. J. (2010) · CRC Press eBooks · doi:10.1201/b10439 · Cited by 140
Self-citationHolden, R. J. (2010) · Cognition Technology & Work · doi:10.1007/s10111-010-0141-8 · Cited by 134
Holden, R. J., & Karsh, B.-T. (2009) · Behaviour & Information Technology · doi:10.1080/01449290601138245 · Cited by 128
Self-citationAdoption Of Health Information Technology For Medication Safety In U.S. Hospitals, 2006
Furukawa, M. F., Raghu, T. S., Spaulding, T. J., & Vinzé, A. (2008) · Health Affairs · doi:10.1377/hlthaff.27.3.865 · Cited by 123
Carayon, P., Wetterneck, T. B., Hundt, A. S., Ozkaynak, M., DeSilvey, J., Ludwig, B., Ram, P., & Rough, S. S. (2007) · Journal of Patient Safety · doi:10.1097/pts.0b013e3180319de7 · Cited by 117
Software for Dependable Systems: Sufficient Evidence?
Jackson, D., & Thomas, M. (2007) · National Academies Press eBooks · Cited by 116
Perspectives on Cognitive Task Analysis
Hoffman, R. R., & Militello, L. G. (2008) · doi:10.4324/9780203809877 · Cited by 114
Commentary Designs are hypotheses about how artifacts shape cognition and collaboration
WOODS, D. D. (1998) · Ergonomics · doi:10.1080/001401398187215 · Cited by 113
Baldacchino, A., Gilchrist, G., Fleming, R., & Bannister, J. (2009) · Addictive Behaviors · doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2009.10.008 · Cited by 113
Kushniruk, A. W. (2001) · Journal of Biomedical Informatics · doi:10.1006/jbin.2001.1021 · Cited by 113
Weinger, M. B. (2002) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m1229 · Cited by 106
Self-citationA direct path to dependable software
Jackson, D. (2009) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/1498765.1498787 · Cited by 104
Kushniruk, A. W., Patel, V. L., & Cimino, J. J. (1997) · PubMed · Cited by 102
Recommendations for Responsible Monitoring and Regulation of Clinical Software Systems
Miller, R. A., & Gardner, R. M. (1997) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1136/jamia.1997.0040442 · Cited by 101
Bundles in the Wild: Managing Information to Solve Problems and Maintain Situation Awareness
Gorman, P., Ash, J. S., Lavelle, M., Lyman, J. A., Delcambre, L., Maier, D., Weaver, M., & Bowers, S. (2000) · Illinois Digital Environment for Access to Learning and Scholarship (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign) · Cited by 100
Koppel, R., & Kreda, D. (2009) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2009.398 · Cited by 99
Pedersen, C. A., & Gumpper, K. F. (2008) · American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy · doi:10.2146/ajhp080488 · Cited by 97
Designs are Hypotheses about How Artifacts Shape Cognition and Collaboration
Woods, D. D. (1998) · Cited by 96
Medical Informatics and the Science of Cognition
Patel, V. L., & Kaufman, D. R. (1998) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1136/jamia.1998.0050493 · Cited by 92
Human Factors Methods for Design
Nemeth, C. (2004) · CRC Press eBooks · doi:10.1201/9780203643662 · Cited by 92
Human Factors Methods for Design: Making Systems Human-Centered
Nemeth, C. (2004) · Thammasat University Digital Collections · Cited by 89
Eight Rights of Safe Electronic Health Record Use
Sittig, D. F. (2009) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2009.1311 · Cited by 85
Medical Error: Is the Solution Medical or Cognitive?
Zhang, J. (2002) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m1232 · Cited by 83
Saleem, J. J., Russ, A. L., Sanderson, P., Johnson, T. R., Zhang, J., & Sittig, D. F. (2009) · Yearbook of Medical Informatics · doi:10.1055/s-0038-1638638 · Cited by 72
Bisantz, A. M., & Roth, E. M. (2007) · Reviews of Human Factors and Ergonomics · doi:10.1518/155723408x299825 · Cited by 70
Abbott, P. A., & Coenen, A. (2008) · Nursing Outlook · doi:10.1016/j.outlook.2008.06.009 · Cited by 69
Self-citationEvaluation of Graphic Cardiovascular Display in a High-Fidelity Simulator
Agutter, J. A., Drews, F. A., Syroid, N., Westneskow, D., Albert, R., Strayer, D. L., Bermudez, J., & Weinger, M. B. (2003) · Anesthesia & Analgesia · doi:10.1213/01.ane.0000085298.03143.cd · Cited by 67
Self-citationWhy did that happen? Exploring the proliferation of barely usable software in healthcare systems
Johnson, C. W. (2006) · Quality in Health Care · doi:10.1136/qshc.2005.016105 · Cited by 61
The Employment of an Iterative Design Process to Develop a Pulmonary Graphical Display
Wachter, S. B. (2003) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m1207 · Cited by 59
van Onzenoort, H. A. W., van de Plas, A., Kessels, A. G. H., et al. (2008) · American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy · doi:10.2146/ajhp070368 · Cited by 53
Automation, interaction, complexity, and failure: A case study
Wears, R. L., Cook, R. I., & Perry, S. J. (2006) · Reliability Engineering & System Safety · doi:10.1016/j.ress.2006.01.009 · Cited by 49
Self-citationDiamond, C. C., & Shirky, C. (2008) · Health Affairs · doi:10.1377/hlthaff.27.5.w383 · Cited by 44
Dijkstra, E. W. (2001) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/365181.365217 · Cited by 39
Human factors research in anesthesia patient safety.
Weinger, M. B., & Slagle, J. M. (2001) · PubMed · Cited by 38
Self-citationPromoting Electronic Health Record Adoption. Is It the Correct Focus?
Simborg, D. W. (2008) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m2573 · Cited by 38
Psychological research on equipment designs in the AAF.
Fitts, P. M. (1947) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/h0053785 · Cited by 35
Medical device and equipment design : usability engineering and ergonomics
Wiklund, M. (1995) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 33
Representational effects on the solving of an unstructured decision problem
Smith, G. F. (1989) · IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics · doi:10.1109/21.44024 · Cited by 33
Consumer health informatics: Health information technology for consumers
Jimison, H. B., & Sher, P. P. (1995) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science · doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-4571(199512)46:10 · Cited by 33
Kaushal, R., Shojania, K. G., & Bates, D. W. (2003) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinte.163.12.1409 · Cited by 30
Status boards in accident & emergency departments: support for shared cognition
Wears, R. L., & Perry, S. J. (2007) · Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science · doi:10.1080/14639220701194304 · Cited by 27
Self-citationComputerized Clinical Decision Support: Will it Transform Healthcare?
Chaudhry, B. I. (2007) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11606-007-0432-9 · Cited by 26
Ebright, P. R. (2004) · Clinical Nurse Specialist · doi:10.1097/00002800-200407000-00002 · Cited by 23
Bundles: meeting clinical information needs.
Ash, J. S., Gorman, P., Lavelle, M., et al. (2001) · PubMed · Cited by 21
Health Information Technology: One Step At A Time
Frisse, M. E. (2009) · Health Affairs · doi:10.1377/hlthaff.28.2.w379 · Cited by 16
Systematic analysis of framing bias in missile defense: Implications toward visualization design
Park, S., & Rothrock, L. (2006) · European Journal of Operational Research · doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2006.07.043 · Cited by 16
Bridging theory and practice: cognitive science and medical informatics.
Patel, V. L., Kaufman, D. R., Arocha, J. F., et al. (1995) · PubMed · Cited by 15
Forcing Functions: The Need for Restraint
Bisantz, A. M., & Wears, R. L. (2009) · Annals of Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2008.07.019 · Cited by 12
Self-citation“Safeware”: Safety-Critical Computing and Health Care Information Technology
Wears, R. L., & Leveson, N. G. (2008) · Cited by 11
Self-citationShavit, O. (2009) · Health Policy · doi:10.1016/j.healthpol.2009.04.003 · Cited by 5
Henriksen, K., Jb, B., Ma, K., et al. (2008) · Cited by 2
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Sauer C . Deciding the future for IS failures: not the choice you might think. In: Currie W Galliers R , eds. Rethinking Management Information Systems. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1999:279–309.
- Hoffman S Podgurski A . Finding a cure: the case for regulation and oversight of electronic health record systems. Harv J Law Technol 2008;22:104–65.
- Berg M . Rationalizing Medical Work. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1997.
- Rubin JR . Handbook of Usability Testing. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, 1994.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Shanafelt, T. D., Dyrbye, L. N., Sinsky, C., Hasan, O., Satele, D., Sloan, J., & West, C. P. (2016) · Mayo Clinic Proceedings · doi:10.1016/j.mayocp.2016.05.007 · Cited by 1,086
“n July 2016 effects.(7,8,35) Based on the data presented herein, they are also associated with an increased risk of burnout among physicians.”
BackgroundHuman factors systems approach to healthcare quality and patient safety
Carayon, P., Wetterneck, T. B., Rivera-Rodriguez, A. J., Hundt, A. S., Hoonakker, P., Holden, R., & Gürses, A. P. (2013) · Applied Ergonomics · doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2013.04.023 · Cited by 814
“The lack of attention to HFE in the design, implementation, and use of health IT contributes to limited success of health IT, the failures to implement and sustain health IT, and safety problems linked to health IT (Karsh et al., 2010).”
BackgroundMiddleton, B., Bloomrosen, M., Dente, M. A., Hashmat, B., Koppel, R., Overhage, J. M., Payne, T. H., Rosenbloom, S. T., Weaver, C., & Zhang, J. (2013) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1136/amiajnl-2012-001458 · Cited by 618
Clinical Decision-Support Systems
Musen, M. A., Middleton, B., & Greenes, R. A. (2013) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4471-4474-8_22 · Cited by 588
(2013) · Europe PMC (PubMed Central) · Cited by 396
Metadata
- Authors
- Karsh, B.-T., Weinger, M. B., Abbott, P. A., & Wears, R. L.
- Affiliations
- University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
- Vanderbilt University (US)
- Johns Hopkins University (US)
- University of Florida (US)
- Corresponding author
- Karsh, Ben-Tzion
- Venue
- Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2010-11
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 617-623
- ISSN
- 1067-5027 (ISSN-L)
- 1527-974X
- PMC
- PMC3000760
- OpenAlex
- W2115602750
- Cited by
- 365
- References
- 116
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 42 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 36 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 48 · 2012: 34
- FWCI
- 62.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (R18SH017899)
- Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (R18HS017902, HS016651, U18HS016651)
- U.S. National Library of Medicine (R01LM008923)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Technology and Human Factors in Education and Health
- Keywords
- health information technology, quality of care, health care costs, human factors engineering, cognitive engineering
- MeSH terms
- Attitude to Health, Diffusion of Innovation, Health Policy, Humans, Medical Informatics, Technology Assessment, Biomedical, United States
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 2026-10-07, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-07 (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
