↓ Skip to main content

A Pilot Study of the Chronology of Present Illness: Restructuring the HPI to Improve Physician Cognition and Communication

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of General Internal Medicine, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
50 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
Title
A Pilot Study of the Chronology of Present Illness: Restructuring the HPI to Improve Physician Cognition and Communication
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine, November 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11606-016-3928-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laura M. Mazer, Tina Storage, Sylvia Bereknyei, Jeffrey Chi, Kelley Skeff

Abstract

Patient history-taking is an essential clinical skill, with effects on diagnostic reasoning, patient-physician relationships, and more. We evaluated the impact of using a structured, timeline-based format, the Chronology of Present Illness (CPI), to guide the initial patient interaction. To determine the feasibility and impact of the CPI on the patient interview, written notes, and communication with other providers. Internal medicine residents used the CPI during a 2-week night-float rotation. For the first week, residents interviewed, documented, and presented patient histories according to their normal practices. They then attended a brief educational session describing the CPI, and were asked to use this method for new patient interviews, notes, and handoffs during the second week. Night and day teams evaluated the method using retrospective pre-post comparisons. Twenty-two internal medicine residents in their second or third postgraduate year. An educational dinner describing the format and potential benefits of using the CPI. Retrospective pre-post surveys on the efficiency, quality, and clarity of the patient interaction, written note, and verbal handoff, as well as open-ended comments. Respondents included night-float residents, day team residents, and attending physicians. All night-float residents responded, reporting significant improvements in written note, verbal sign-out, assessment and plan, patient interaction, and overall efficiency (p < 0.05). Day team residents (n = 76) also reported increased clarity in verbal sign-out and written note, improved efficiency, and improved preparedness for presenting the patient (p < 0.05). Attending physician ratings did not differ between groups. Resident ratings indicate that the CPI can improve key aspects of patient care, including the patient interview, note, and physician-physician communication. These results suggest that the method should be taught and implemented more frequently.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 50 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 56 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 14%
Other 7 13%
Researcher 4 7%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Librarian 3 5%
Other 12 21%
Unknown 18 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 7%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 18 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 38. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 October 2022.
All research outputs
#1,077,484
of 25,587,485 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#872
of 8,225 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,399
of 418,347 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#11
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,587,485 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,225 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 418,347 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.