Impact of Electronic Health Record Use on Cognitive Load and Burnout Among Clinicians: Narrative Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The cognitive load theory suggests that completing a task relies on the interplay between sensory input, working memory, and long-term memory. Cognitive overload occurs when the working memory's limited capacity is exceeded due to excessive information processing. In health care, clinicians face increasing cognitive load as the complexity of patient care has risen, leading to potential burnout. Electronic health records (EHRs) have become a common feature in modern health care, offering improved access to data and the ability to provide better patient care. They have been added to the electronic ecosystem alongside emails and other resources, such as guidelines and literature searches. Concerns have arisen in recent years that despite many benefits, the use of EHRs may lead to cognitive overload, which can impact the performance and well-being of clinicians. We aimed to review the impact of EHR use on cognitive load and how it correlates with physician burnout. Additionally, we wanted to identify potential strategies recommended in the literature that could be implemented to decrease the cognitive burden associated with the use of EHRs, with the goal of reducing clinician burnout. Using a comprehensive literature review on the topic, we have explored the link between EHR use, cognitive load, and burnout among health care professionals. We have also noted key factors that can help reduce EHR-related cognitive load, which may help reduce clinician burnout. The research findings suggest that inadequate efforts to present large amounts of clinical data to users in a manner that allows the user to control the cognitive burden in the EHR and the complexity of the user interfaces, thus adding more "work" to tasks, can lead to cognitive overload and burnout; this calls for strategies to mitigate these effects. Several factors, such as the presentation of information in the EHR, the specialty, the health care setting, and the time spent completing documentation and navigating systems, can contribute to this excess cognitive load and result in burnout. Potential strategies to mitigate this might include improving user interfaces, streamlining information, and reducing documentation burden requirements for clinicians. New technologies may facilitate these strategies. The review highlights the importance of addressing cognitive overload as one of the unintended consequences of EHR adoption and potential strategies for mitigation, identifying gaps in the current literature that require further exploration.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".