These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
300 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25326598)
1. Completeness, accuracy, and computability of National Quality Forum-specified eMeasures. Amster A; Jentzsch J; Pasupuleti H; Subramanian KG J Am Med Inform Assoc; 2015 Mar; 22(2):409-16. PubMed ID: 25326598 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparing manual and automated coding of physicians quality reporting initiative measures in an ambulatory EHR. McColm D; Karcz A J Med Pract Manage; 2010; 26(1):6-12. PubMed ID: 20839502 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. eMeasures: a standard format for health quality measures. Chronaki C; Jaffe C; Dolin B Stud Health Technol Inform; 2011; 169():989-91. PubMed ID: 21893894 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Validation of Stroke Meaningful Use Measures in a National Electronic Health Record System. Phipps MS; Fahner J; Sager D; Coffing J; Maryfield B; Williams LS J Gen Intern Med; 2016 Apr; 31 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):46-52. PubMed ID: 26951273 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Transforming clinical quality measures for EHR use. NQF refines emeasures for use in EHRs and meaningful use program. Kallem C J AHIMA; 2011; 82(11):52-3. PubMed ID: 22184829 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Evidence-based management of ambulatory electronic health record system implementation: an assessment of conceptual support and qualitative evidence. McAlearney AS; Hefner JL; Sieck C; Rizer M; Huerta TR Int J Med Inform; 2014 Jul; 83(7):484-94. PubMed ID: 24862893 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Assessing the validity of national quality measures for coronary artery disease using an electronic health record. Persell SD; Wright JM; Thompson JA; Kmetik KS; Baker DW Arch Intern Med; 2006 Nov; 166(20):2272-7. PubMed ID: 17101947 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Associations between healthcare quality and use of electronic health record functions in ambulatory care. Ancker JS; Kern LM; Edwards A; Nosal S; Stein DM; Hauser D; Kaushal R; J Am Med Inform Assoc; 2015 Jul; 22(4):864-71. PubMed ID: 25896648 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Learning from primary care meaningful use exemplars. Ornstein SM; Nemeth LS; Nietert PJ; Jenkins RG; Wessell AM; Litvin CB J Am Board Fam Med; 2015; 28(3):360-70. PubMed ID: 25957369 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The challenge of measuring quality of care from the electronic health record. Roth CP; Lim YW; Pevnick JM; Asch SM; McGlynn EA Am J Med Qual; 2009; 24(5):385-94. PubMed ID: 19482968 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Which functionalities are available in the electronic health record systems used by French general practitioners? An assessment study of 15 systems. Darmon D; Sauvant R; Staccini P; Letrilliart L Int J Med Inform; 2014 Jan; 83(1):37-46. PubMed ID: 24231269 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Evaluation of a comprehensive EHR based on the DeLone and McLean model for IS success: approach, results, and success factors. Bossen C; Jensen LG; Udsen FW Int J Med Inform; 2013 Oct; 82(10):940-53. PubMed ID: 23827768 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Medicare and Medicaid programs; modifications to the Medicare and Medicaid Electronic Health Record (EHR) Incentive Program for 2014 and other changes to EHR Incentive Program; and health information technology: revision to the certified EHR technology definition and EHR certification changes related to standards. Final rule. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), and Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC), HHS Fed Regist; 2014 Sep; 79(171):52909-33. PubMed ID: 25195218 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Evaluating the data completeness in the Electronic Health Record after the Implementation of an Outpatient Electronic Health Record. Soto M; Capurro D; Catalán S Stud Health Technol Inform; 2015; 216():885. PubMed ID: 26262187 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Documentation and coding of ED patient encounters: an evaluation of the accuracy of an electronic medical record. Silfen E Am J Emerg Med; 2006 Oct; 24(6):664-78. PubMed ID: 16984834 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Exploring the business case for ambulatory electronic health record system adoption. Song PH; McAlearney AS; Robbins J; McCullough JS J Healthc Manag; 2011; 56(3):169-80; discussion 181-2. PubMed ID: 21714372 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Relationship between use of electronic health record features and health care quality: results of a statewide survey. Poon EG; Wright A; Simon SR; Jenter CA; Kaushal R; Volk LA; Cleary PD; Singer JA; Tumolo AZ; Bates DW Med Care; 2010 Mar; 48(3):203-9. PubMed ID: 20125047 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Using a stakeholder-engaged approach to develop and validate electronic clinical quality measures. Herndon JB; Aravamudhan K; Stephenson RL; Brandon R; Ruff J; Catalanotto F; Le H J Am Med Inform Assoc; 2017 May; 24(3):503-512. PubMed ID: 28339559 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Review: electronic health records and the reliability and validity of quality measures: a review of the literature. Chan KS; Fowles JB; Weiner JP Med Care Res Rev; 2010 Oct; 67(5):503-27. PubMed ID: 20150441 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]