PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 6, 2026BMJ Open0 citationsOpen Access

Patients before paperwork: a feasibility study evaluating digital and human scribes in psychiatric clinical settings – a randomised controlled trial protocol

View Full Paper
JDJessica DyckEPEssence PereraBFBraidin Filbert

Key Points

  • To assess the impact of digital and human scribes on administrative burden for psychiatrists in clinical settings.
  • Randomised controlled crossover study with 10 psychiatrists over 3 months.
  • Phases include baseline, human scribes, and digital scribes.
  • Analysis of physician characteristics and practice patterns using parametric and non-parametric tests.
  • Expected reduction in administrative burden with both types of scribes.
  • Patient satisfaction is a key measure of effectiveness.

Abstract

Introduction There are national calls for reducing physician administrative burden. While interest in digital scribes (DS) is growing, there is limited evidence evaluating their safety and effectiveness. In contrast, human scribes (HS) have demonstrated significant benefits in multiple controlled studies. To our knowledge, no prior study has compared the utility of HS versus DS in improving clinical efficiency in psychiatric clinical settings. We hypothesise that HS and DS will reduce administrative burden for psychiatrists compared with no scribes. Methods and analysis Following institutional ethics board approvals, we will conduct a randomised controlled crossover study with 10 Manitoba psychiatrists. Study phases will include 1 month periods for baseline, HS and DS for a total of 3 months. Measures will include physician characteristics, practice patterns, administrative hours and patient satisfaction. Depending on distributional characteristics, data will be analysed using parametric or non-parametric tests to compare scribed and non-scribed periods as well as HS versus DS. Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval has been obtained from the Committee for Harmonized Health Impact, Privacy, and Ethics Review (CHIPER) Health Research Ethics Board, which is the ethics board for medical research at the University of Manitoba (HS26944 (H2025:154)). The results of this trial will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed journal and provincial and national conference presentations. Integrated knowledge translation will be conducted throughout the duration of the research process with key stakeholders including medical organisations, such as the provincial health organisation. Protocol version 1.2, 9 April 2026

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Dyck et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69fa8e8904f884e66b530e66https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2025-115741
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper