Menu
Not yet recruiting NCT07742618

Effectiveness of AI-Assisted Clinical Documentation

No phase Interventional Effectiveness of AI-assisted Clinical Documentation Tool Healthy

For patients and families

In plain language

An automatic summary of structured registry data. It is an orientation aid, not a substitute for the official protocol or a physician assessment.

What is being studied
The protocol lists: AI clinical documentation tool, AI clinical documentation tool.
Who it may be relevant to
Registry conditions: Effectiveness of AI-assisted Clinical Documentation Tool, Healthy. Basic parameters: from 18 years · All.
What needs checking
Age, condition and sex are only basic indicators. Prior treatment, laboratory values and other mandatory requirements appear in the eligibility criteria below.
Where it takes place
Finland
Next step
Save the trial, show it to the treating physician, and confirm current recruitment with the study center. Costs, documents and travel →
Official title

Effectiveness of AI-Assisted Clinical Documentation: Evidence From a Staggered Rollout at the Western Uusimaa Wellbeing Services County

Overview

Effectiveness of AI-assisted clinical documentation tool (AI scribes) in healthcare services using staggered difference-in-differences and multiple sources of data including registers, questionnaires and interviews. Primary outcomes include completion of statutory health check-ups, working hours, time use of nurses, secondary outcomes include subjective nurse job satisfaction, job burden and perceived quality of work and time use.

Interventions

  • Device AI clinical documentation tool
    AI clinical documentation tool is adopted starting at different assigned time points by eight subgroups. Early vs later adopters are compared using staggered difference-in-differences design. The order of subgroups is randomized for 7/8 subgroups.
  • Device AI clinical documentation tool
    AI clinical documentation tool is adopted starting at different assigned time points by eight subgroups. Early vs later adopters are compared using staggered difference-in-differences design. The order of subgroups is randomized for 7/8 subgroups.

Primary outcome measures

  • Ratio of completed statutory health check-ups [Time frame: 7 months.]
  • Number of completed statutory health check-ups [Time frame: 7 months.]
  • Working Hours [Time frame: 7 months.]
Secondary outcome measures (2)
  • Time use [Time frame: 7 months.]
  • Job Satisfaction [Time frame: 7 months.]

Eligibility criteria

Inclusion criteria

  • Member of study population: nurses working at wellchild or student health care services of Western-Uusimaa Wellbeing Services County.

Exclusion criteria

  • Nurse works in several teams.
  • Under 18 years.

Criteria are shown verbatim from the registry (in English). Final eligibility is always assessed by the study center.

Healthy volunteers: Yes

Study design

Allocation
Randomized
Model
Sequential
Masking
Open label
Primary purpose
Health services research

Study locations

Finland · 1 center
  • University of Turku — Turku

Identifiers

NCT: NCT07742618 · TY/1110/2026

Primary sources (government registries)

View this study on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗