CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 155Electronic Health Records SystemsTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourInformation Systems Theories and Implementation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 98 of the 99 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A knowledge-based taxonomy of critical factors for adopting electronic health record systems by physicians: a systematic literature review

Open access
Castillo, Víctor H, Martínez-García, Ana I, Pulido, JRG·2010·BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
DOI 10.1186/1472-6947-10-60PMC PMC2970582
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The health care sector is an area of social and economic interest in several countries; therefore, there have been lots of efforts in the use of electronic health records. Nevertheless, there is evidence suggesting that these systems have not been adopted as it was expected, and although there are some proposals to support their adoption, the proposed support is not by means of information and communication technology which can provide automatic tools of support. The aim of this study is to identify the critical adoption factors for electronic health records by physicians and to use them as a guide to support their adoption process automatically. METHODS: This paper presents, based on the PRISMA statement, a systematic literature review in electronic databases with adoption studies of electronic health records published in English. Software applications that manage and process the data in the electronic health record have been considered, i.e.: computerized physician prescription, electronic medical records, and electronic capture of clinical data. Our review was conducted with the purpose of obtaining a taxonomy of the physicians main barriers for adopting electronic health records, that can be addressed by means of information and communication technology; in particular with the information technology roles of the knowledge management processes. Which take us to the question that we want to address in this work: "What are the critical adoption factors of electronic health records that can be supported by information and communication technology?". Reports from eight databases covering electronic health records adoption studies in the medical domain, in particular those focused on physicians, were analyzed. RESULTS: The review identifies two main issues: 1) a knowledge-based classification of critical factors for adopting electronic health records by physicians; and 2) the definition of a base for the design of a conceptual framework for supporting the design of knowledge-based systems, to assist the adoption process of electronic health records in an automatic fashion. From our review, six critical adoption factors have been identified: user attitude towards information systems, workflow impact, interoperability, technical support, communication among users, and expert support. The main limitation of the taxonomy is the different impact of the adoption factors of electronic health records reported by some studies depending on the type of practice, setting, or attention level; however, these features are a determinant aspect with regard to the adoption rate for the latter rather than the presence of a specific critical adoption factor. CONCLUSIONS: The critical adoption factors established here provide a sound theoretical basis for research to understand, support, and facilitate the adoption of electronic health records to physicians in benefit of patients.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/1472-6947-10-60

Cites

98 of 98 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 The innovation-diffusion process proposed by Rogers [9].
Figure 1 The innovation-diffusion process proposed by Rogers [9].CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 Using knowledge for supporting adoption of clinical information systems.
Figure 2 Using knowledge for supporting adoption of clinical information systems.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3 Use of the critical adoption factors of clinical information systems to inform the development of systems for supporting its adoption process.
Figure 3 Use of the critical adoption factors of clinical information systems to inform the development of systems for supporting its adoption process.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 4 Flow diagram of included and excluded studies.
Figure 4 Flow diagram of included and excluded studies.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 5 Relationship among critical factors for adopting electronic health record systems with information and communication technology roles.
Figure 5 Relationship among critical factors for adopting electronic health record systems with information and communication technology roles.CC BY · PubMed Central

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

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

Show all 99 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. HIMSS: Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society. HIMSS hot topics survey. Annual HIMSS Conference and Exhibition. Atlanta. 2002
  2. HarrisInteractive: U.S. Trails Other English Speaking Countries in Use of Electronic Medical Records and Electronic Prescribing. HarrisInteractive Health Care News. 2001, 1:

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–155 of 155

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Castillo, V. H., Martínez-García, A. I., & Pulido, J.
Affiliations
  • Centro de Investigación Científica y de Educación Superior de Ensenada (MX)
  • Universidad de Colima (MX)
Corresponding author
Castillo, Víctor H
ORCID
Venue
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2010-10-15
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
60-60
ISSN
1472-6947 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1186/1472-6947-10-60
PMC
PMC2970582
OpenAlex
W2107188450
Cited by
155
References
99
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 7
FWCI
1.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Universidad de Colima
  • Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
Keywords
electronic health records, technology adoption, physicians, adoption factors, barriers to adoption, expert systems, knowledge management, interoperability, user attitudes, technical support, expert support, conceptual framework
MeSH terms
Attitude to Computers, Diffusion of Innovation, Practice Patterns, Physicians', 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