The Impact of Electronic Health Records on Diagnosis
Abstract
Diagnostic error may be the largest unaddressed patient safety concern in the United States, responsible for an estimated 40,000–80,000 deaths annually. With the electronic health record (EHR) now in near universal use, the goal of this narrative review is to synthesize evidence and opinion regarding the impact of the EHR and health care information technology (health IT) on the diagnostic process and its outcomes. We consider the many ways in which the EHR and health IT facilitate diagnosis and improve the diagnostic process, and conversely the major ways in which it is problematic, including the unintended consequences that contribute to diagnostic error and sometimes patient deaths. We conclude with a summary of suggestions for improving the safety and safe use of these resources for diagnosis in the future.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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?
The copy-paste shortcut results in inaccuracies, outdated information, and sometimes misleading patient records.
“Unfortunately, this shortcut results in inaccuracies, outdated information, and sometimes misleading patient records [183].”
From Toward Safer Diagnoses: A SEIPS-Based Narrative Review of Diagnostic Errors (2026) · cites this paper as [183]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 87 · Cited by 108
- Authors
- Graber, M. L., Byrne, C., & Johnston, D.
- Affiliations
- RTI International (US)
- Corresponding author
- Graber, Mark L.
- Venue
- Diagnosis
- Publisher
- Walter de Gruyter GmbH
- Published
- 2017-09-08
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 211-223
- ISSN
- 2194-8011 (ISSN-L)
- 2194-802X
- OpenAlex
- W2751967052
- Cited by
- 108
- References
- 87
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 9
- FWCI
- 1.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Diagnosis (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Keywords
- electronic health records, diagnostic errors, health information technology, patient safety, diagnostic process, patient death
- MeSH terms
- Diagnosis, Humans, Medical Informatics, United States, Decision Support Systems, Clinical, Electronic Health Records, Patient Safety
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
