Back

Randomized Trial Protocol: Epic Generative AI Chart Summarization Tool to Reduce Ambulatory Provider Cognitive Task Load

Chin, A. T.; Zhu, N.; Kingsley, T. C.; Mynampati, P.; Phipps, Y.; Romanov, A.; Vangala, S.; Weng, M.; Wisk, L. E.; Woo, H.; Mafi, J. N.; Lukac, P. J.

2026-02-22 health informatics
10.64898/2026.02.20.26346503 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundEHR documentation and chart review contribute to clinician workload and burnout. To alleviate pre-charting burden, Epic has released a new generative AI chart summarizer tool, which has become widely adopted; however, its impact has not been examined in randomized trials. ObjectiveTo evaluate whether access to an Epic generative AI chart summarization tool reduces cognitive task load among ambulatory providers compared with usual care. MethodsTwo-arm, parallel-group randomized controlled trial among ambulatory clinicians across multiple specialties. Clinicians will be randomized 1:1 to tool access versus usual care for 90 days. The primary outcome is change in a 4-item physician task load (PTL) adapted for the pre-charting task. Exploratory outcomes include EHR-derived time metrics (Caboodle and Signal), professional fulfillment/burnout (PFI), usability (SUS), clinician satisfaction, aggregated patient experience item from CG-CAHPS, and reported safety related metrics. Ethics and DisseminationAnalyses will use clinician-level survey responses and aggregated EHR metrics; no patient-level protected health information will be included in the analytic dataset. Results will be disseminated via preprint and peer-reviewed publication. Article summary - Strengths and limitations of this studyO_LIThis study is a 3-month pragmatic randomized controlled trial evaluating a native EHR-embedded generative AI tool that summarizes prior clinical notes for ambulatory encounters. C_LIO_LIThe primary outcome uses a validated cognitive task load instrument adapted specifically for pre-charting activities. C_LIO_LIExploratory outcomes include objective EHR-derived time metrics, validated psychometric measures of burnout and professional fulfillment, and clinician-reported survey measures assessing perceived usefulness of the tool. C_LIO_LIThe trial is single-centered, which may limit generalizabilty, and the intervention is optional-use and unblinded, which may attenuate observed effects and introduce performance bias. C_LI

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
16.9%
2
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
13.9%
3
JAMIA Open
37 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.8%
4
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 3%
6.6%
5
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.8%
50% of probability mass above
6
Journal of General Internal Medicine
20 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.5%
7
JMIR Formative Research
32 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.5%
8
BMJ Health & Care Informatics
13 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.5%
9
DIGITAL HEALTH
12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.0%
10
Frontiers in Digital Health
20 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.0%
11
PLOS Digital Health
91 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
2.8%
12
Pilot and Feasibility Studies
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.6%
13
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
39 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.0%
14
Journal of Biomedical Informatics
45 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.0%
15
BMJ Open Quality
15 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.0%
16
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 51%
1.8%
17
Journal of Clinical and Translational Science
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.8%
18
JMIR Medical Informatics
17 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.7%
19
JMIR Research Protocols
18 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.6%
20
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
45 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.2%
21
Preventive Medicine Reports
14 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.2%
22
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
23
Healthcare
16 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
24
BMC Health Services Research
42 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
25
BMC Medical Research Methodology
43 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
26
Journal of Affective Disorders Reports
10 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
27
Trials
25 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
28
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 79%
0.6%
29
International Journal of Medical Informatics
25 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%