↓ Skip to main content

Ethical Implications of the Electronic Health Record: In the Service of the Patient

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of General Internal Medicine, March 2017
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 (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
twitter
8 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
68 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
346 Mendeley
Title
Ethical Implications of the Electronic Health Record: In the Service of the Patient
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine, March 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11606-017-4030-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lois Snyder Sulmasy, Ana María López, Carrie A. Horwitch, , American College of Physicians Ethics, Professionalism and Human Rights Committee

Abstract

Electronic health records (EHRs) provide benefits for patients, physicians, and clinical teams, but also raise ethical questions. Navigating how to provide care in the digital age requires an assessment of the impact of the EHR on patient care and the patient-physician relationship. EHRs should facilitate patient care and, as an essential component of that care, support the patient-physician relationship. Billing, regulatory, research, documentation, and administrative functions determined by the operational requirements of health care systems, payers, and others have resulted in EHRs that are better able to satisfy such external functions than to ensure that patient care needs are met. The profession has a responsibility to identify and address this mismatch. This position paper by the American College of Physicians (ACP) Ethics, Professionalism and Human Rights Committee does not address EHR design, user variability, meaningful use, or coding requirements and other government and payer mandates per se; these issues are discussed in detail in ACP's Clinical Documentation policy. This paper focuses on EHRs and the patient-physician relationship and patient care; patient autonomy, privacy and confidentiality; and professionalism, clinical reasoning and training. It explores emerging ethical challenges and concerns for and raised by physicians across the professional lifespan, whose ongoing input is crucial to the development and use of information technology that truly serves patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 346 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 345 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 58 17%
Student > Bachelor 48 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 7%
Researcher 19 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 5%
Other 53 15%
Unknown 126 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 68 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 57 16%
Computer Science 20 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 14 4%
Social Sciences 12 3%
Other 45 13%
Unknown 130 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 45. 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 10 November 2022.
All research outputs
#888,548
of 24,792,414 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#730
of 8,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,510
of 314,728 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#9
of 92 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,792,414 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,016 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 particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 314,728 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 92 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.