SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2001
Computerised advice on drug dosage to improve prescribing practice.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 46 citations in OpenAlex.
- Computerized advice on drug dosage to improve prescribing practice.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013Pooled it
- Do computerised clinical decision support systems for prescribing change practice? A systematic review of the literature (1990-2007).BMC health services research · 2009Pooled it
- Improving clinical practice using clinical decision support systems: a systematic review of trials to identify features critical to success.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2005Pooled it
- Impact of health information technology interventions to improve medication laboratory monitoring for ambulatory patients: a systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIAPooled it
- Computerized clinical decision support for prescribing: provision does not guarantee uptake.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIAPooled it
- What evidence supports the use of computerized alerts and prompts to improve clinicians' prescribing behavior?Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIAPooled it
- The effect of a clinical decision support system on prompting an intervention for risky alcohol use in a primary care smoking cessation program: a cluster randomized trial.Implementation science : IS · 2019Trial
- Usefulness of a mobile app to improve performance of specialists in responding correctly to CRC screening and surveillance clinical scenarios.Endoscopy international open · 2021Article
- Article
- Clinical decision support systems-based interventions to improve medication outcomes: A systematic literature review on features and effects.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2021Review
- Article
- User perspectives on an electronic decision-support tool performing comprehensive medication reviews - a focus group study with physicians and nurses.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2016Article
- Overview of systematic reviews of the effectiveness of reminders in improving healthcare professional behavior.Systematic reviews · 2012Review
- Physicians' attitudes towards copy and pasting in electronic note writing.Journal of general internal medicine · 2009Article
- Monitoring for adverse drug reactions.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2006Review
- [Incidence and prevention of lethal undesirable drug effects].Der Internist · 2003Review
- Determination of bleeding risk using genetic markers in patients taking phenprocoumon.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2003Article
- Identifying barriers and tailoring interventions to improve the management of urinary tract infections and sore throat: a pragmatic study using qualitative methods.BMC health services research · 2003Article
- Research questions for systematic reviews must be unambiguous from protocol stage.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 1999Article
- A review on systematic reviews of health information system studies.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIAReview
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMaintaining therapeutic concentrations of toxic drugs is a complex task. Several computer systems have been designed to help doctors determine optimum drug dosage. Significant improvements in health could be achieved if computer advice was shown to be beneficial.
objectivesTo assess whether computer support for drug dosage benefits patients and hence whether it should be more widely available. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group specialised register (June 1996), MEDLINE (1966 to June 1996), EMBASE (1980 to June 1996), hand searched the journal Therapeutic Drug Monitoring (1979 to June 1996), reference lists of articles and contacted experts in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials, interrupted time series and controlled before and after studies of computerised advice on drug dosage. The participants were health professionals responsible for patient care. The outcomes were: any objectively measured change in the behaviour of the health care provider (such as changes in the dose of drug used); any change in the health of patients, resulting from computer support (such as adverse reactions to drugs). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed study quality. MAIN
resultsFifteen trials involving 1229 patients were included. The drugs studied were theophylline, warfarin, heparin, aminoglycosides, nitroprusside, lignocaine, oxytocin, fentanyl and midazolam. Interventions usually targeted doctors although some studies attempted to influence prescribing by pharmacists and nurses. All included studies took place on acute medical conditions in hospital settings. Although all studies used reliable outcome measures, sample size was often small and only two studies reported a sample size calculation. Computer support for drug dosage gave significant benefits reducing: 1. The time to achieve therapeutic control (standardised mean difference -0.44, 95% CI -0.70 to -0.17); 2. Toxic drug levels (risk difference -0.12, 95% CI -0.24 to -0.01); 3. Adverse reactions (risk difference -0.06, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.00); 4. Length of hospital stay (standardised mean difference -0.32, 95% CI -0.60 to -0.04). There was a tendency for computer support to result in higher doses of drugs, although this did not reach statistical significance. REVIEWER'S
conclusionsThis systematic review provides evidence to support the use of computer assistance in determining drug dosage. Further clinical trials are necessary to determine whether the benefits seen in specialist applications can be realised in general use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.