ScholarWorksIndianapolis
  • Communities & Collections
  • Browse ScholarWorks
  • English
  • Català
  • Čeština
  • Deutsch
  • Español
  • Français
  • Gàidhlig
  • Italiano
  • Latviešu
  • Magyar
  • Nederlands
  • Polski
  • Português
  • Português do Brasil
  • Suomi
  • Svenska
  • Türkçe
  • Tiếng Việt
  • Қазақ
  • বাংলা
  • हिंदी
  • Ελληνικά
  • Yкраї́нська
  • Log In
    or
    New user? Click here to register.Have you forgotten your password?
  1. Home
  2. Browse by Author

Browsing by Author "Lehmann, Christoph U."

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
Results Per Page
Sort Options
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Characteristics of the National Applicant Pool for Clinical Informatics Fellowships (2016-2017)
    (AMIA, 2018) Bell, Douglas S.; Baldwin, Kevin; Bell, Elijah J.; Lehmann, Christoph U.; Webber, Emily C.; Mohan, Vishnu; Leu, Michael G.; Hoffman, Jeffrey M.; Kaelber, David C.; Landman, Adam B.; Hron, Jonathan; Silverman, Howard D.; Levy, Bruce; Elkin, Peter L.; Poon, Eric; Luberti, Anthony A.; Finnell, John T.; Safran, Charles; Palma, Jonathan P.; Forman, Bruce H.; Kileen, James; Arvin, David; Pfeffer, Michael; Pediatrics, School of Medicine
    We conducted a national study to assess the numbers and diversity of applicants for 2016 and 2017 clinical informatics fellowship positions. In each year, we collected data on the number of applications that programs received from candidates who were ultimately successful vs. unsuccessful. In 2017, we also conducted an anonymous applicant survey. Successful candidates applied to an average of 4.2 and 5.5 programs for 2016 and 2017, respectively. In the survey, unsuccessful candidates reported applying to fewer programs. Assuming unsuccessful candidates submitted between 2-5 applications each, the total applicant pool numbered 42-69 for 2016 (competing for 24 positions) and 52-85 for 2017 (competing for 30 positions). Among survey respondents (n=33), 24% were female, 1 was black and none were Hispanic. We conclude that greater efforts are needed to enhance interest in clinical informatics among medical students and residents, particularly among women and members of underrepresented minority groups.
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Do electronic health record systems "dumb down" clinicians?
    (Oxford University Press, 2022) Melton, Genevieve B.; Cimino, James J.; Lehmann, Christoph U.; Sengstack, Patricia R.; Smith, Joshua C.; Tierney, William M.; Miller, Randolph A.; Community and Global Health, Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health
    A panel sponsored by the American College of Medical Informatics (ACMI) at the 2021 AMIA Symposium addressed the provocative question: "Are Electronic Health Records dumbing down clinicians?" After reviewing electronic health record (EHR) development and evolution, the panel discussed how EHR use can impair care delivery. Both suboptimal functionality during EHR use and longer-term effects outside of EHR use can reduce clinicians' efficiencies, reasoning abilities, and knowledge. Panel members explored potential solutions to problems discussed. Progress will require significant engagement from clinician-users, educators, health systems, commercial vendors, regulators, and policy makers. Future EHR systems must become more user-focused and scalable and enable providers to work smarter to deliver improved care.
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Policy Statement on Clinical Informatics Fellowships and the Future of Informatics- Driven Medicine
    (Thieme, 2020-10) Kannry, Joseph; Smith, Jeff; Mohan, Vishnu; Levy, Bruce; Finnell, John; Lehmann, Christoph U.; Emergency Medicine, School of Medicine
    Board certified clinical informaticians provide expertise in leveraging health IT (HIT) and health data for patient care and quality improvement. Clinical Informatics experts possess the requisite skills and competencies to make systems-level improvements in care delivery using HIT, workflow and data analytics, knowledge acquisition, clinical decision support, data visualization, and related informatics tools. However, these physicians lack structured and sustained funding because they have no billing codes. The sustainability and growth of this new and promising medical subspecialty is threatened by outdated and inconsistent funding models that fail to support the education and professional growth of clinical informaticians. The Clinical Informatics Program Directors' Community is calling upon the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to consider novel funding structures and programs through its Innovation Center for Clinical Informatics Fellowship training. Only through structural and sustained funding for Clinical Informatics fellows will be able to fully develop the potential of electronic health records to improve the quality, safety, and cost of clinical care.
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Structure and Funding of Clinical Informatics Fellowships: A National Survey of Program Directors
    (Thieme, 2024) Patel, Tushar N.; Chaise, Aaron J.; Hanna, John J.; Patel, Kunal P.; Kochendorfer, Karl M.; Medford, Richard J.; Mize, Dara E.; Melnick, Edward R.; Hron, Jonathan D.; Youens, Kenneth; Pandita, Deepti; Leu, Michael G.; Ator, Gregory A.; Yu, Feliciano; Genes, Nicholas; Baker, Carrie K.; Bell, Douglas S.; Pevnick, Joshua M.; Conrad, Steven A.; Chandawarkar, Aarti R.; Rogers, Kendall M.; Kaelber, David C.; Singh, Ila R.; Levy, Bruce P.; Finnell, John T.; Kannry, Joseph; Pageler, Natalie M.; Mohan, Vishnu; Lehmann, Christoph U.; Emergency Medicine, School of Medicine
    Background: In 2011, the American Board of Medical Specialties established clinical informatics (CI) as a subspecialty in medicine, jointly administered by the American Board of Pathology and the American Board of Preventive Medicine. Subsequently, many institutions created CI fellowship training programs to meet the growing need for informaticists. Although many programs share similar features, there is considerable variation in program funding and administrative structures. Objectives: The aim of our study was to characterize CI fellowship program features, including governance structures, funding sources, and expenses. Methods: We created a cross-sectional online REDCap survey with 44 items requesting information on program administration, fellows, administrative support, funding sources, and expenses. We surveyed program directors of programs accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education between 2014 and 2021. Results: We invited 54 program directors, of which 41 (76%) completed the survey. The average administrative support received was $27,732/year. Most programs (85.4%) were accredited to have two or more fellows per year. Programs were administratively housed under six departments: Internal Medicine (17; 41.5%), Pediatrics (7; 17.1%), Pathology (6; 14.6%), Family Medicine (6; 14.6%), Emergency Medicine (4; 9.8%), and Anesthesiology (1; 2.4%). Funding sources for CI fellowship program directors included: hospital or health systems (28.3%), clinical departments (28.3%), graduate medical education office (13.2%), biomedical informatics department (9.4%), hospital information technology (9.4%), research and grants (7.5%), and other sources (3.8%) that included philanthropy and external entities. Conclusion: CI fellowships have been established in leading academic and community health care systems across the country. Due to their unique training requirements, these programs require significant resources for education, administration, and recruitment. There continues to be considerable heterogeneity in funding models between programs. Our survey findings reinforce the need for reformed federal funding models for informatics practice and training.
About IU Indianapolis ScholarWorks
  • Accessibility
  • Privacy Notice
  • Copyright © 2025 The Trustees of Indiana University