Effectiveness and Efficiency of TV’s Brand-Building Power: A Historical Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 60 (4) ◽  
pp. 361-369
Author(s):  
FRANK FINDLEY ◽  
KELLY JOHNSON ◽  
DOUGLAS CRANG ◽  
DAVID W. STEWART
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jackson Steinkamp ◽  
Jacob Kantrowitz ◽  
Abhinav Sharma ◽  
Wasif Bala

UNSTRUCTURED Clinicians spend a substantial part of their workday reviewing and writing electronic medical notes. Here we describe how the current, widely accepted paradigm for electronic medical notes represents a poor organizational framework for both the individual clinician and the broader medical team. As described in this viewpoint, the medical chart—including notes, labs, and imaging results—can be reconceptualized as a dynamic, fully collaborative workspace organized by topic rather than time, writer, or data type. This revised framework enables a more accurate and complete assessment of the current state of the patient and easy historical review, saving clinicians substantial time on both data input and retrieval. Collectively, this approach has the potential to improve health care delivery effectiveness and efficiency.


10.2196/24179 ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. e24179
Author(s):  
Jackson Steinkamp ◽  
Jacob Kantrowitz ◽  
Abhinav Sharma ◽  
Wasif Bala

Clinicians spend a substantial part of their workday reviewing and writing electronic medical notes. Here we describe how the current, widely accepted paradigm for electronic medical notes represents a poor organizational framework for both the individual clinician and the broader medical team. As described in this viewpoint, the medical chart—including notes, labs, and imaging results—can be reconceptualized as a dynamic, fully collaborative workspace organized by topic rather than time, writer, or data type. This revised framework enables a more accurate and complete assessment of the current state of the patient and easy historical review, saving clinicians substantial time on both data input and retrieval. Collectively, this approach has the potential to improve health care delivery effectiveness and efficiency.


2009 ◽  
Vol 14 (6) ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Robert J. Barth

Abstract Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is a controversial, ambiguous, unreliable, and unvalidated concept that, for these very reasons, has been justifiably ignored in the “AMA Guides Library” that includes the AMAGuides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), the AMA Guides Newsletter, and other publications in this suite. But because of the surge of CRPS-related medicolegal claims and the mission of the AMA Guides to assist those who adjudicate such claims, a discussion of CRPS is warranted, especially because of what some believe to be confusing recommendations regarding causation. In 1994, the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) introduced a newly invented concept, CRPS, to replace the concepts of reflex sympathetic dystrophy (replaced by CRPS I) and causalgia (replaced by CRPS II). An article in the November/December 1997 issue of The Guides Newsletter introduced CRPS and presciently recommended that evaluators avoid the IASP protocol in favor of extensive differential diagnosis based on objective findings. A series of articles in The Guides Newsletter in 2006 extensively discussed the shortcomings of CRPS. The AMA Guides, Sixth Edition, notes that the inherent lack of injury-relatedness for the nonvalidated concept of CRPS creates a dilemma for impairment evaluators. Focusing on impairment evaluation and not on injury-relatedness would greatly simplify use of the AMA Guides.


2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raychel C. Muenke ◽  
Valerie Weed
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document