Talk:Electronic medical record

message: Some nerd at 207.74.79.75 thought he was funny and changed a statistic from 600,000 to "over 9000". I reverted it back.
The original reference has been moved by the LA Times, however Electronic Health Records has the correct one.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.215.170.130 (talk) 20:34, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Over 9000 Strikes Again 

message: appear to be a hive of nonnotable websites trying to promote themselves.  Does anybody agree with me that the charts should be removed? ThemFromSpace 17:13, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The charts 

message: Could we add a link to Microchip implant (human)? Stars4change (talk) 05:54, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: And say that's the future of every person's medical history, which gets lost from changing doctors often.  No one knows what shots they had from birth but the chip implant will make it easy to know that info for a lifetime. It can also eliminate paper and save forests. Stars4change (talk) 04:52, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia doesn't do speculation.  An implantable chip also seems rather unnecessarily invasive since people can always get looked up by name and birthday and birthplace, or ID number like SSN. -- Beland (talk) 15:16, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Link Microchip implant (human)

message: Please don't just redirect, but start a discussion if you think this article should be merged with EHR. Thanks Mootros (talk) 19:31, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I was thinking about it, but when I read what was left, I didn't see anything, with the possible exception of the protocol list, that wasn't already there. I've commented at WT:WikiProject Medicine to try to get more input on the topic.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:38, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! I think they are two distinct topics. But lets see what input we get.Mootros (talk) 19:50, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with merging. I'm in the medical field though not IT, and I don't consider them different. So I doubt the average reader will; they will only be confused and scattered to and fro. If the articles' information is really redundant, then that's more reason to merge. - Draeco (talk) 23:39, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I have said this before but point it out again (and I am an IT professional rather than health). An EHR is the idea of a record containing health information. That includes but is not limited to medical information. EMR implies only information relevant to medicine which is more restrictive. But still, the difference basically a minor point of language. I'd support the merging of the two articles because, for the lay person (and increasingly the expert) they are one and the same. Donama (talk) 01:06, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree too. (130.37.60.174 (talk) 16:39, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree too. pojoman  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.142.232.7 (talk) 20:59, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree too. Electronic health record is a much more complete and useful article.Dikteren (talk) 17:09, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

text: --KnowESys (talk) 14:14, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger attempts 2009?

message: It says in the first sentence of 'Comparison with paper-based records' that "Paper-based records are still by far the most common method of recording patient information for most hospitals and practices in the U.S."
But in the usage section, it states that 72% of office physicians are using basic electronic medical records.
I believe the first statement is outdated data from 2009.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.252.102.185 (talk) 04:39, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, I've removed what seems to be the outdated text. Mikael Häggström (talk) 09:53, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradicting statistics 

message: Positive: 
The article attempts to address the many areas associated with Electronic Medical Records,it describes the overall goal and objectives of the system including its uses, advantages, quality control, legalities, technical features which are essential to address.
Suggestions:
As Electronic Medical Records are a higher quantification of current Paper based medical records, I suggest that further detail is required in terms of privacy. It would also be good if infrastructure topics are explored within the article in order to highlight its importance and reasons why EMR's haven't been implemented world wide.
::The above was placed on the category page by User:PHUIII.  DexDor (talk) 20:28, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The main page has been moved now, so perhaps you want to place this at Talk:Electronic health record? Mikael Häggström (talk) 18:20, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stuff moved from [[:Category:Informatics Content Review/Feedback]]