从电子病历事件日志数据中创建换算系数:初级保健医生的研究人员得出的指标与供应商得出的指标之比较》(A Comparison of Investigator-Derived Metrics and Vendor-Derived Metrics for Primary Care Physicians)。

AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium Pub Date : 2024-01-11 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01
Honor S Magon, Daniel Helkey, Tait Shanafelt, Daniel Tawfik
{"title":"从电子病历事件日志数据中创建换算系数:初级保健医生的研究人员得出的指标与供应商得出的指标之比较》(A Comparison of Investigator-Derived Metrics and Vendor-Derived Metrics for Primary Care Physicians)。","authors":"Honor S Magon, Daniel Helkey, Tait Shanafelt, Daniel Tawfik","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Physicians spend a large amount of time with the electronic health record (EHR), which the majority believe contributes to their burnout. However, there are limitedstandardized measures of physician EHR time. Vendor-derived metrics are standardized but may underestimate real-world EHR experience. Investigator-derived metrics may be more reliable but not standardized, particularly with regard to timeout thresholds defining inactivity. This study aimed to enable standardized investigator-derived metrics using conversion factors between raw event log-derived metrics and Signal (Epic System's standardized metric) for primary care physicians. This was an observational, retrospective longitudinal study of EHR raw event logs and Signal data from a quaternary academic medical center and its community affiliates in California, over a 6-month period. The study evaluated 242 physicians over 1370 physician-months, comparing 53.7 million event logs to 6850 Signal metrics, in five different time based metrics. Results show that inactivity thresholds for event log metric derivation that most closely approximate Signal metrics ranged from 90 seconds (Visit Navigator) to 360 seconds (\"Pajama time\") depending on the metric. Based on this data, conversion factors for investigator-derived metrics across a wide range of inactivity thresholds, via comparison with Signal metrics, are provided which may allow researchers to consistently quantify EHR experience.</p>","PeriodicalId":72180,"journal":{"name":"AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10785859/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Creating Conversion Factors from EHR Event Log Data: A Comparison of Investigator-Derived and Vendor-Derived Metrics for Primary Care Physicians.\",\"authors\":\"Honor S Magon, Daniel Helkey, Tait Shanafelt, Daniel Tawfik\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Physicians spend a large amount of time with the electronic health record (EHR), which the majority believe contributes to their burnout. However, there are limitedstandardized measures of physician EHR time. Vendor-derived metrics are standardized but may underestimate real-world EHR experience. Investigator-derived metrics may be more reliable but not standardized, particularly with regard to timeout thresholds defining inactivity. This study aimed to enable standardized investigator-derived metrics using conversion factors between raw event log-derived metrics and Signal (Epic System's standardized metric) for primary care physicians. This was an observational, retrospective longitudinal study of EHR raw event logs and Signal data from a quaternary academic medical center and its community affiliates in California, over a 6-month period. The study evaluated 242 physicians over 1370 physician-months, comparing 53.7 million event logs to 6850 Signal metrics, in five different time based metrics. Results show that inactivity thresholds for event log metric derivation that most closely approximate Signal metrics ranged from 90 seconds (Visit Navigator) to 360 seconds (\\\"Pajama time\\\") depending on the metric. Based on this data, conversion factors for investigator-derived metrics across a wide range of inactivity thresholds, via comparison with Signal metrics, are provided which may allow researchers to consistently quantify EHR experience.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72180,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10785859/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

医生在电子病历(EHR)上花费了大量时间,大多数医生认为这导致了他们的职业倦怠。然而,对医生使用电子病历时间的标准化衡量标准有限。供应商提供的指标是标准化的,但可能会低估真实世界的电子病历使用经验。研究人员得出的指标可能更可靠,但并不标准化,尤其是在定义不活动的超时阈值方面。本研究旨在使用原始事件日志衍生指标与 Signal(Epic 系统的标准化指标)之间的转换系数,为全科医生提供标准化的研究人员衍生指标。这是一项观察性、回顾性纵向研究,研究对象是加利福尼亚州一家四级学术医疗中心及其社区附属医院在 6 个月内的 EHR 原始事件日志和 Signal 数据。该研究评估了 242 名医生 1370 个医生月的情况,比较了 5370 万个事件日志和 6850 个 Signal 指标,其中有五个不同的时间指标。结果显示,最接近 Signal 指标的事件日志指标推导的非活动阈值从 90 秒(访问导航仪)到 360 秒("睡衣时间")不等,具体取决于指标。根据这些数据,通过与 Signal 指标的比较,提供了研究人员在广泛的不活动阈值范围内衍生指标的换算系数,从而使研究人员能够一致地量化电子健康记录体验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Creating Conversion Factors from EHR Event Log Data: A Comparison of Investigator-Derived and Vendor-Derived Metrics for Primary Care Physicians.

Physicians spend a large amount of time with the electronic health record (EHR), which the majority believe contributes to their burnout. However, there are limitedstandardized measures of physician EHR time. Vendor-derived metrics are standardized but may underestimate real-world EHR experience. Investigator-derived metrics may be more reliable but not standardized, particularly with regard to timeout thresholds defining inactivity. This study aimed to enable standardized investigator-derived metrics using conversion factors between raw event log-derived metrics and Signal (Epic System's standardized metric) for primary care physicians. This was an observational, retrospective longitudinal study of EHR raw event logs and Signal data from a quaternary academic medical center and its community affiliates in California, over a 6-month period. The study evaluated 242 physicians over 1370 physician-months, comparing 53.7 million event logs to 6850 Signal metrics, in five different time based metrics. Results show that inactivity thresholds for event log metric derivation that most closely approximate Signal metrics ranged from 90 seconds (Visit Navigator) to 360 seconds ("Pajama time") depending on the metric. Based on this data, conversion factors for investigator-derived metrics across a wide range of inactivity thresholds, via comparison with Signal metrics, are provided which may allow researchers to consistently quantify EHR experience.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Towards Fair Patient-Trial Matching via Patient-Criterion Level Fairness Constraint. Towards Understanding the Generalization of Medical Text-to-SQL Models and Datasets. Transferable and Interpretable Treatment Effectiveness Prediction for Ovarian Cancer via Multimodal Deep Learning. Understanding Cancer Caregiving and Predicting Burden: An Analytics and Machine Learning Approach. Usability and Recall Evaluation of Virtual Reality Ontology Object Manipulation (VROOM) System.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1