Structured Fields and Free Text in Practice Records

Structured fields and free text do different jobs. A field makes a defined item easier to find; narrative gives a clinician room to record context. When choosing practice software, test whether the two work together without forcing staff to copy information between screens.

Start with the information you need to retrieve

List the administrative items the team repeatedly looks for, such as an appointment date, a contact detail or a document category. Ask the supplier to show how those items are entered, corrected and found later.

For clinical records, the clinician decides what information and context are needed. A template is an organisational aid, not evidence that a record is complete or clinically correct. Avoid treating an empty field, a default value and a confirmed negative finding as interchangeable.

Keep room for context and corrections

Use an invented record in a demonstration. Enter a structured item and a narrative note, then correct one of them. Ask whether related views change, who can make the correction and what change history is available.

• Does the original context remain understandable?
• Can staff distinguish a draft from a signed or released document?
• Are patient details kept separate from billing and communication contacts?
• Can a clinician explain why a template field was left blank?

These checks assess the workflow. They do not establish compliance or clinical adequacy by themselves.

Check templates and assistance separately

In Brigid, approved templates provide structures for clinician-authored records. Dictation returns editable text on the configured route. Where enabled for the clinic, note assistance can prepare a note or letter from a transcript or existing note for the clinician to check, edit and sign. It does not interpret results or make clinical decisions.

Ask the supplier to demonstrate the exact enabled workflow. Do not assume that a transcript automatically becomes a clinical note, a billing code or a released letter.

Do not infer an integration from a field

A field containing a GP name or insurer identifier does not establish a connection to that organisation. Brigid does not currently offer HealthLink integration. Automated insurer eligibility checks, claim or pre-authorisation submission and reconciliation (VHI, Laya, Irish Life, Level Health, PCRS/GMS) are not in the launch release; staff use each insurer's normal channels.

For any required connection, ask which information is sent, who approves it and how a failed or incomplete transfer is handled. Check the current integration status before agreeing a workflow.

Test exports and access with representative records

Ask for the available export formats and the scope of each export in writing. Check whether attachments, dates, identifiers and relevant record context are included. Do not assume support for HL7, a particular migration format or every historical field.

Test staff permissions and ask for evidence of the access, edit and export events covered by logging. The Brigid records page identifies current capabilities and acceptance requirements; the switching guide explains why mappings and representative records need checking before cutover.

Bring one record workflow to the demonstration

Start with the sample practice, which uses invented records. For a guided walkthrough, bring a description of one workflow you want to evaluate, without patient-identifying information. Record what is demonstrated, what needs setup and what is not supported. That is more useful than choosing between “structured” and “free text” as if one label settles every requirement.

Editorial correction, 3 October 2026: unsupported product, compliance and outcome claims in the earlier version have been replaced with a workflow-evaluation checklist. No customer outcome is asserted.

Ask Brigid is looking for a small number of founding consultant practices. Request early access and we will reply with current availability and the next step.