Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15187069›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA

Electronic screening of dictated reports to identify patients with do-not-resuscitate status.

Dominik Aronsky, Evelyn Kasworm, Jay A Jacobson, Peter J Haug, Nathan C Dean

Open access · bronzeAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. An evaluation of the UMLS in representing corpus derived clinical concepts.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2011
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Dominik AronskyDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN 37232-8340, USA. dominik.aronsky@vanderbilt.edu
Evelyn Kasworm
Jay A Jacobson
Peter J Haug
Nathan C Dean
Vanderbilt University · USLDS Hospital · USUniversity of Utah · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveDo-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders and advance directives are increasingly prevalent and may affect medical interventions and outcomes. Simple, automated techniques to identify patients with DNR orders do not currently exist but could help avoid costly and time-consuming chart review. This study hypothesized that a decision to withhold cardiopulmonary resuscitation would be included in a patient's dictated reports. The authors developed and validated a simple computerized search method, which screens dictated reports to detect patients with DNR status.

methodsA list of concepts related to DNR order documentation was developed using emergency department, hospital admission, consult, and hospital discharge reports of 665 consecutive, hospitalized pneumonia patients during a four-year period (1995-1999). The list was validated in an independent group of 190 consecutive inpatients with pneumonia during a five-month period (1999-2000). The reference standard for the presence of DNR orders was manual chart review of all study patients. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and nonerror rates were calculated for individual and combined concepts.

resultsThe list of concepts included: DNR, Do Not Attempt to Resuscitate (DNAR), DNI, NCR, advanced directive, living will, power of attorney, Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR), defibrillation, arrest, resuscitate, code, and comfort care. As determined by manual chart review, a DNR order was written for 32.6% of patients in the derivation and for 31.6% in the validation group. Dictated reports included DNR order-related information for 74.5% of patients in the derivation and 73% in the validation group. If mentioned in the dictated report, the combined keyword search had a sensitivity of 74.2% in the derivation group (70.0% in the validation group), a specificity of 91.5% (81.5%), a positive predictive value of 80.9% (63.6%), a negative predictive value of 88.0% (85.5%), and a nonerror rate of 85.9% (77.9%). DNR and resuscitate were the most frequently used and power of attorney and advanced directives the least frequently used terms.

conclusionDictated hospital reports frequently contained DNR order-related information for patients with a written DNR order. Using an uncomplicated keyword search, electronic screening of dictated reports yielded good accuracy for identifying patients with DNR order information.

Indexed as

Medical Records Systems, ComputerizedResuscitation OrdersSubject HeadingsAdvance DirectivesAgedAlgorithmsFemaleHumansInformation Storage and RetrievalMaleMedical RecordsPneumonia

Identifiers

PMID15187069
PMCPMC516247
OpenAlexW2104601798

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.