{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,13]],"date-time":"2026-10-13T00:48:08Z","timestamp":1791852488695,"version":"4.3.4"},"reference-count":25,"publisher":"Georg Thieme Verlag KG","issue":"04","content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Appl Clin Inform"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2026,8]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:p>Background Patient safety reporting studies usually examine intention, submitted reports, or reporting rates, leaving unclear what happens after a report is started but before it is submitted, deleted, or left unfinished. We evaluated whether autosave and fixed-time reminders make this hidden stage observable.<\/jats:p>\n                  <jats:p>Objectives This study aimed to quantify draft outcomes, interaction burden, completion timing, return-to-draft behavior, and reminder-linked submission among autosaved incident report drafts.<\/jats:p>\n                  <jats:p>Methods This was a retrospective log-based study of draft header records and action logs from March 2024 through March 2026. Reminder exposure was defined as a draft remaining incomplete at the daily 05:31 batch; return as a load action within 24 hours after first eligibility. Analyses used descriptive statistics and site-adjusted logistic regression with reporter-clustered standard errors.<\/jats:p>\n                  <jats:p>Results Among 6,835 drafts, 5,397 (79.0%) were submitted, 1,268 (18.6%) were deleted, and 170 (2.5%) were pending. Completed reports were usually rapid (median: 15.0 min; 81.7% within 60 min), but 1,961 drafts (28.7%) had at least one return\/load action. Among submitted drafts with action logs, the median interaction burden was 2 actions (interquartile range: 1\u20133). Overall, 1,617 drafts (23.7%) were reminder-exposed; 337 (20.8%) returned within 24 hours. Return within 24 hours was strongly associated with submission (74.2 vs. 19.8%; adjusted odds ratio: 11.16, 95% confidence interval: 7.29\u201317.09).<\/jats:p>\n                  <jats:p>Conclusion Draft-level logs expose the previously unmeasured middle of incident reporting. Autosave captured interrupted work, and reminder-linked return identified a high-yield recovery point for at-risk drafts. These findings show how interruption-resilient design can support actual report completion, not only reporting intention or submitted-report counts.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1055\/a-2971-4388","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,13]],"date-time":"2026-10-13T00:05:43Z","timestamp":1791849943000},"page":"912-921","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Autosaved Incident Report Drafts: Log-Based Evidence of Completion, Return-to-Complete Behavior, and Reminder-Linked Submission in a Multisite Patient Safety Reporting System"],"prefix":"10.1055","volume":"17","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0009-0008-8217-8801","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Szu-Chang","family":"Wang","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, Taiwan","place":["Kaohsiung"],"department":["Department of Information Management"]}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"194","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,12]]},"reference":[{"issue":"03","key":"ref1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"893","DOI":"10.4338\/ACI-2016-02-R-0023","article-title":"Enhancing patient safety event reporting. a systematic review of system design features","volume":"8","author":"Y Gong","year":"2017","journal-title":"Appl Clin Inform"},{"issue":"02","key":"ref2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"248","DOI":"10.4338\/ACI-2012-03-RA-0010","article-title":"Classifying health information technology patient safety related incidents - an approach used in Wales","volume":"3","author":"D Warm","year":"2012","journal-title":"Appl Clin Inform"},{"issue":"02","key":"ref3","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"593","DOI":"10.4338\/ACI-2017-01-RA-0014","article-title":"An analysis of patient safety incident reports associated with electronic health record interoperability","volume":"8","author":"K T Adams","year":"2017","journal-title":"Appl Clin Inform"},{"issue":"03","key":"ref4","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.1093\/intqhc\/mzad056","article-title":"Comparing rates of adverse events detected in incident reporting and the Global Trigger Tool: a systematic review","volume":"35","author":"P D Hibbert","year":"2023","journal-title":"Int J Qual Health Care"},{"issue":"04","key":"ref5","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"279","DOI":"10.4258\/hir.2012.18.4.279","article-title":"Barriers to the operation of patient safety incident reporting systems in Korean general hospitals","volume":"18","author":"J I Hwang","year":"2012","journal-title":"Healthc Inform Res"},{"issue":"04","key":"ref6","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"199","DOI":"10.3109\/02813432.2012.732469","article-title":"Reasons for not reporting patient safety incidents in general practice: a qualitative study","volume":"30","author":"M B Kousgaard","year":"2012","journal-title":"Scand J Prim Health Care"},{"issue":"06","key":"ref7","first-page":"e62850","article-title":"Barriers to incident reporting by physicians: a survey of surgical residents and attending physicians","volume":"16","author":"M J Anderson","year":"2024","journal-title":"Cureus"},{"key":"ref8","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"6724890","DOI":"10.1155\/jonm\/6724890","article-title":"Handling features of patient safety incident reporting software and shortcomings in report processing from healthcare professionals\u2019 perspectives: a cross-sectional study with a qualitative design","volume":"2025","author":"S Koskiniemi","year":"2025","journal-title":"J Nurs Manag"},{"issue":"04","key":"ref9","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"284","DOI":"10.1136\/qshc.2009.039255","article-title":"The impact of interruptions on clinical task completion","volume":"19","author":"J I Westbrook","year":"2010","journal-title":"Qual Saf Health Care"},{"issue":"02","key":"ref10","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"179","DOI":"10.1016\/0749-5978(91)90020-T","article-title":"The theory of planned behavior","volume":"50","author":"I Ajzen","year":"1991","journal-title":"Organ Behav Hum Decis Process"},{"issue":"09","key":"ref11","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"503","DOI":"10.1111\/spc3.12265","article-title":"The intention\u2013behavior gap","volume":"10","author":"P Sheeran","year":"2016","journal-title":"Soc Personal Psychol Compass"},{"issue":"03","key":"ref12","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"480","DOI":"10.1093\/jamia\/ocz196","article-title":"Using electronic health record audit logs to study clinical activity: a systematic review of aims, measures, and methods","volume":"27","author":"A Rule","year":"2020","journal-title":"J Am Med Inform Assoc"},{"issue":"03","key":"ref13","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"395","DOI":"10.1055\/s-0039-1691841","article-title":"Building usability knowledge for health information technology: a usability-oriented analysis of incident reports","volume":"10","author":"R Marcilly","year":"2019","journal-title":"Appl Clin Inform"},{"issue":"01","key":"ref14","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"25","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jses.2017.03.002","article-title":"E-mail reminders improve completion rates of patient-reported outcome measures","volume":"1","author":"J J Triplet","year":"2017","journal-title":"JSES Open Access"},{"issue":"01","key":"ref15","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.1017\/jmo.2015.8","article-title":"Barriers to incident-reporting behavior among nursing staff: A study based on the theory of planned behavior","volume":"22","author":"Y-H Lee","year":"2016","journal-title":"J Manage Organ"},{"key":"ref16","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"38","DOI":"10.1016\/j.nedt.2017.07.017","article-title":"Factors affecting nursing students\u2019 intention to report medication errors: An application of the theory of planned behavior","volume":"58","author":"M Ben Natan","year":"2017","journal-title":"Nurse Educ Today"},{"issue":"03","key":"ref17","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"138","DOI":"10.21109\/kesmas.v11i3.1091","article-title":"Nurses\u2019 intention and behavior in reporting adverse event: application of theory of planned behavior","volume":"11","author":"N P Ekayani","year":"2017","journal-title":"Kesmas Natl Public Health J"},{"issue":"01","key":"ref18","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"52","DOI":"10.5455\/msm.2013.25.52-55","article-title":"Applying theory of planned behavior in predicting of patient safety behaviors of nurses","volume":"25","author":"M Javadi","year":"2013","journal-title":"Mater Sociomed"},{"issue":"01","key":"ref19","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"35","DOI":"10.1093\/intqhc\/mzs078","article-title":"The effect of a workflow-based response system on hospital-wide voluntary incident reporting rates","volume":"25","author":"S C Wang","year":"2013","journal-title":"Int J Qual Health Care"},{"issue":"03","key":"ref20","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"169","DOI":"10.1136\/qshc.2006.019349","article-title":"Evaluation of an intervention aimed at improving voluntary incident reporting in hospitals","volume":"16","author":"S M Evans","year":"2007","journal-title":"Qual Saf Health Care"},{"issue":"02","key":"ref21","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"175","DOI":"10.1197\/jamia.M2196","article-title":"Integrating incident reporting into an electronic patient record system","volume":"14","author":"G Haller","year":"2007","journal-title":"J Am Med Inform Assoc"},{"issue":"07","key":"ref22","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"422","DOI":"10.1097\/PTS.0000000000001151","article-title":"Multifaceted intervention to improve patient safety incident reporting in intensive care units","volume":"19","author":"E M Griffeth","year":"2023","journal-title":"J Patient Saf"},{"issue":"7624","key":"ref23","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"806","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.39335.541782.AD","article-title":"Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies","volume":"335","author":"E von Elm","year":"2007","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"issue":"10","key":"ref24","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e1001885","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pmed.1001885","article-title":"RECORD Working Committee. The REporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely-collected health Data (RECORD) statement","volume":"12","author":"E I Benchimol","year":"2015","journal-title":"PLoS Med"},{"issue":"02","key":"ref25","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"212","DOI":"10.1055\/s-0044-1782228","article-title":"Explaining variability in electronic health record effort in primary care ambulatory encounters","volume":"15","author":"J M Overhage","year":"2024","journal-title":"Appl Clin Inform"}],"container-title":["Applied Clinical Informatics"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"http:\/\/www.thieme-connect.de\/products\/ejournals\/pdf\/10.1055\/a-2971-4388.pdf","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,13]],"date-time":"2026-10-13T00:05:54Z","timestamp":1791849954000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"http:\/\/www.thieme-connect.de\/DOI\/DOI?10.1055\/a-2971-4388"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,8]]},"references-count":25,"journal-issue":{"issue":"04","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,14]]},"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2026,8]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1055\/a-2971-4388","archive":["Portico","CLOCKSS"],"relation":{},"ISSN":["1869-0327"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1869-0327","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,8]]}}}