ArticleJMIR human factors2025
Comparisons of Physicians', Nurses', and Social Welfare Professionals' Experiences With Participation in Information System Development: Cross-Sectional Survey Study.
Article in JMIR human factors, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The integration of health care and social welfare services together with the consolidation of health care information systems (HISs) and client information systems (CISs) has become a timely topic. Despite this development, there is a scarcity of systematic research on physicians', registered nurses' (RNs) and social welfare professionals' (SWPs) experiences of participating in the development of HISs and CISs. Objective: This study aimed to examine how physicians, RNs and SWPs experience collaboration with HIS or CIS vendors, and what kinds of end users have participated in HIS or CIS development. Methods: National cross-sectional usability surveys were conducted in Finland among RNs and SWPs in 2020 and physicians in 2021. Questions concerning participation experiences were analyzed by professional group, working sector, managerial position, and age. Results: In total, 4683 physicians, 3610 RNs, and 990 SWPs responded to the surveys. In all 3 professional groups, those working in nonmanagerial positions and the youngest respondents participated least in HIS or CIS development, and 76% (n=3528) of physicians, 78% (n=2814) of RNs and 67% (n=664) of SWPs had not participated at all. When comparing the groups, physicians were least aware of feedback processes and least satisfied with vendors' interest in end-user feedback and the manner and speed of HIS development. Those who had dedicated working time for HIS or CIS development were less critical of vendors' interest and responsiveness to development ideas than those who had not participated at all. In all 3 professional groups, the youngest were most dissatisfied with HIS and CIS vendor collaboration. Conclusions: Experiences of participation in HIS and CIS development were relatively negative across all 3 professional groups, with physicians being the most critical. Dialogue and collaboration between developers and end users-also the youngest ones and frontline workers-need improvement; simply increasing allotted working time is unlikely to produce more positive participation experiences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.