{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03090507726269316, 'fraction_numerical': 0.017660044150110375, 'mean_word_length': 5.212328767123288, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[A user evaluation of software programs in family practice].

Software for electronic patient journals was evaluated. A questionnaire was sent to a total of 551 general practitioners working on contract, salaried general practitioners and specialist practitioners. Among the 345 respondents, 63% used electronic journals. Three programs dominated. Legeservice (n = 94) was exclusively used by salaried general practitioners, Profdoc (n = 88) and Infodoc (n = 34) were preferred by general practitioners working on contract and by specialists. In the latter group only 40% used electronic journals. In general, the users of Profdoc and Infodoc were satisfied with the central functions of the software and the service provided by the suppliers. The users of Legeservice were significantly less satisfied. In conclusion, some of the existing software for patient journals in Norway can safely be recommended.