↓ Skip to main content

Physician, Scribe, and Patient Perspectives on Clinical Scribes in Primary Care

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
16 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
60 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
152 Mendeley
Title
Physician, Scribe, and Patient Perspectives on Clinical Scribes in Primary Care
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine, April 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11606-016-3719-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chen Yan, Susannah Rose, Michael B. Rothberg, Mary Beth Mercer, Kenneth Goodman, Anita D. Misra-Hebert

Abstract

Extending medical assistants and nursing roles to include in-visit documentation is a recent innovation in the age of electronic health records. Despite the use of these clinical scribes, little is known regarding interactions among and perspectives of the involved parties: physicians, clinical scribes, and patients. The purpose of this project is to describe perspectives of physicians, clinical scribes, and patients regarding clinical scribes in primary care. We used qualitative content analysis, using Interpretive Description of semi-structured audio-recorded in-person and telephone interviews. Participants included 18 physicians and 17 clinical scribes from six healthcare systems, and 36 patients from one healthcare system. Despite physician concerns regarding terminology within notes, physicians, clinical scribes, and patients perceived more detailed notes because of real-time documentation by scribes. Most patients were comfortable with the scribe's presence and perceived increased attention from their physicians. Clinical scribes also performed more active roles during a patient visit, leading to formation of positive scribe-patient relationships. The resulting shift in workflow, however, led to stress. Our theoretical model for successful physician-scribe teams emphasizes the importance of interpersonal aspects such as communication, mutual respect, and adaptability, as well as system level support such as training and staffing. Both interpersonal fit between physician and scribe, and system level support including adequate training, transition time, and staffing support are necessary for successful use of clinical scribes. Future directions for research regarding clinical scribes include study of care continuity, scribe medical knowledge, and scribe burnout.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 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 152 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 151 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 16%
Researcher 23 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 9%
Student > Bachelor 13 9%
Other 10 7%
Other 26 17%
Unknown 42 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 12%
Social Sciences 11 7%
Computer Science 8 5%
Engineering 4 3%
Other 27 18%
Unknown 47 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 23 March 2019.
All research outputs
#1,395,138
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#1,130
of 7,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,117
of 302,413 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#18
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,806 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 302,413 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 100 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.