The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
How Common Are Electronic Health Records In The United States? A Summary Of The Evidence: About one-fourth of U.S. physician practices are now using an EHR, according to the results of high-quality surveys.
Abstract
Electronic health records (EHRs) are promising tools to improve quality and efficiency in health care, but data on their adoption rate are limited. We identified surveys on EHR adoption and assessed their quality. Although surveys returned widely different estimates of EHR use, when available information is limited to studies of high or medium quality, national estimates are possible: Through 2005, approximately 23.9 percent of physicians used EHRs in the ambulatory setting, while 5 percent of hospitals used computerized physician order entry. Large gaps in knowledge, including information about EHR use among safety-net providers, pose critical challenges for the development of policies aimed at speeding adoption.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“eHealth adoption and ongoing maintenance requires a large capital investment [131-133].”
From Health Care Provider Adoption of eHealth: Systematic Literature Review (2013) · cites this paper as [132]
Citations
Cites
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
Casalino, L. P., Gillies, R. R., Shortell, S. M., Schmittdiel, J. A., Bodenheimer, T. S., Robinson, J. C., Rundall, T. G., Oswald, N., Schauffler, H. H., & Wang, M. C. (2003) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.289.4.434 · Cited by 473
(2002) · Computers in health care · doi:10.1007/978-1-4613-0069-4 · Cited by 425
Medical Groups’ Adoption Of Electronic Health Records And Information Systems
Gans, D. N., Kralewski, J. E., Hammons, T., & Dowd, B. E. (2005) · Health Affairs · doi:10.1377/hlthaff.24.5.1323 · Cited by 403
Which Physicians And Practices Are Using Electronic Medical Records?
Burt, C. W., & Sisk, J. E. (2005) · Health Affairs · doi:10.1377/hlthaff.24.5.1334 · Cited by 159
Information technologies: when will they make it into physicians' black bags?
Audet, A., Doty, M. M., Peugh, J., Shamasdin, J., Zapert, K., & Schoenbaum, S. C. (2004) · PubMed · Cited by 151
U.S. Adoption Of Computerized Physician Order Entry Systems
Cutler, D., Feldman, N. E., & Horwitz, J. R. (2005) · Health Affairs · doi:10.1377/hlthaff.24.6.1654 · Cited by 147
Achieving U.S. Health Information Technology Adoption: The Need For A Third Hand
Middleton, B. (2005) · Health Affairs · doi:10.1377/hlthaff.24.5.1269 · Cited by 54
Are Minority Children the Last to Benefit from a New Technology?
Ferris, T. G. G., Kuhlthau, K. A., Ausiello, J. C., Perrin, J. M., & Kahn, R. S. (2005) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/01.mlr.0000188914.47033.cd · Cited by 50
Self-citationLimited information technology for patient care in physician offices.
Reed, M. C., & Grossman, J. M. (2004) · PubMed · Cited by 18
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- Audet A.M., 2004, Medscape General Medicine, 6, 2
- 10.1377/hlthaff.24.5.1323 · DOI
- 10.1377/hlthaff.24.6.1654 · DOI
- Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society, 2005, Sixteenth Annual HIMSS Leadership Survey, Healthcare CIO Results: Questionaire Index
- HIMSS, 2005, Sixteenth Annual HIMSS Leadership Survey, Healthcare CIO Results: Final Report
- Laschober M., 2005, Hospital Responses to Public Reporting of Quality Data to CMS: 2005 Survey of Hospitals
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 301–304 of 304
Diaz, R. L. (2013) · CommonKnowledge Research Repository (Pacific University Oregon)
Malhan, A. S. (2019) · University of North Texas Digital Library (University of North Texas) · doi:10.12794/metadc1538677
Customer Strategy Definition in Elderly Care
Khashab, B. M., Joshi, U. B., & Gulliver, S. R. (2014) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-6339-8.ch061
Puspita, B., Januraga, P. P., Budayanti, N., Pramartha, C. R. A., Jawi, I. M., Wirawan, I. M. A., Ani, L. S., & Sutiari, N. K. (2026) · Russian Open Medical Journal · doi:10.15275/rusomj.2026.0308
Metadata
- Authors
- Jha, A. K., Ferris, T. G., Donelan, K., DesRoches, C., Shields, A., Rosenbaum, S., & Blumenthal, D.
- Affiliations
- Harvard University (US)
- ORCID
- Venue
- Health Affairs
- Publisher
- Health Affairs Publishing, LLC
- Published
- 2006-01
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- Suppl1
- Pages
- W496-W507
- ISSN
- 0278-2715 (ISSN-L)
- 1544-5208
- OpenAlex
- W2160477814
- Cited by
- 304
- References
- 11
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 19
- FWCI
- 93.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Health Affairs (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Medical Coding and Health Information
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Healthcare Policy and Management
- Keywords
- electronic health records, EHR adoption, computerized physician order entry, outpatient care, hospitals, safety net providers, health IT policy, survey quality
- MeSH terms
- Ambulatory Care Information Systems, Diffusion of Innovation, Hospital Information Systems, Humans, Michigan, Organizational Innovation, United States, Medical Records Systems, Computerized, Health Care Surveys, Medical Order Entry Systems
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
