English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Parallel to the monumental problem of replacing paper-and-pen-based patient information management systems with electronic ones is the problem of evaluating the extent to which the change represents an improvement. All clinicians must grapple with this daunting challenge; those with little or no informatics expertise may be particularly surprised by the attendant difficulties. To do so successfully, they must be able to explicitly conceptualize the daily clinical work-a prerequisite for appreciating and reasonably evaluating it. Further, few of these evaluators may have reflected on the dynamic interaction between their work and their tools-how changing a tool necessarily changes the work. This article illuminates these problems by telling the story of how one patient care information systems committee first learned to think about the purpose of a patient information management system, and second, how to evaluate the impact of its implementation.

Discovering How to Think about a Hospital Patient Information System by Struggling to Evaluate It: A Committee's Journal