Cited by 41Electronic Health Records SystemsMedical Coding and Health InformationNursing Diagnosis and Documentation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Assessment of Data Quality of and Staff Satisfaction with an Electronic Health Record System in a Developing Country (Uganda): A Qualitative and Quantitative Comparative Study

Ndira, S.P., Rosenberger, K.D., Wetter, T.·2008·Methods of Information in Medicine

Abstract

Objectives To assess if electronic health record systems in developing countries can improve on timeliness, availability and accuracy of routine health reports and staff satisfaction after introducing the electronic system, compared to the paper-based alternative. Methods The research was conducted with hospital staff of Tororo District Hospital in Uganda. A comparative intervention study with qualitative and quantitative methods was used to compare the paper-based (pre-test) to the electronic system (post-test) focusing on accuracy, availability and timeliness of monthly routine reports about mothers visiting the hospital; and staff satisfaction with the electronic system as outcome measures. Results Timeliness: pre-test 13 of 19 months delivered to the district timely, delivery dates for six months could not be established; post-test 100%. Availability pre-test 79% of reports were present at the district health office; post-test 100%. Accuracy: pre-test 73.2% of selected reports could be independently confirmed as correct; post-test 71.2%. Difficulties were encountered in finding enough mothers through direct follow up to inquire on accuracy of information recorded about them. Staff interviews showed that the electronic system is appreciated by the majority of the hospital staff. Remaining obstacles include staff workload, power shortages, network breakdowns and parallel data entry (paper-based and electronic). Conclusion While timeliness and availability improved, improvem…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3414/me0511

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 28 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Ndira, S. P., Rosenberger, K. D., & Wetter, T.
Affiliations
Heidelberg University (DE)
Corresponding author
Wetter, T.
Venue
Methods of Information in Medicine
Published
2008
Volume
47
Issue
06
Pages
489-498
ISSN
  • 0026-1270 (ISSN-L)
  • 2511-705X
OpenAlex
W2064046338
Cited by
40
References
28
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 4
FWCI
3.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Methods of Information in Medicine (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
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Research and Theory › Nursing Diagnosis and Documentation
Keywords
electronic health records, data quality, staff satisfaction, paper records, timeliness, data accuracy, developing countries, hospital information systems
MeSH terms
Developing Countries, Humans, Information Systems, Job Satisfaction, Quality of Health Care, Research Design, Uganda, Medical Records Systems, Computerized, Access to Information, Qualitative Research

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