ArticleApplied clinical informatics2013
Lessons learned for collaborative clinical content development.
Article in Applied clinical informatics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analysis of clinical decision support system malfunctions: a case series and survey.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2016Article
- Prioritization and Refinement of Clinical Data Elements within EHR Systems.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2016Article
- A Decade of Experience in Creating and Maintaining Data Elements for Structured Clinical Documentation in EHRs.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2016Article
- Integrated IT Platform for Coordination of Diagnosis, Treatment, and Aftercare of Prosthetic Joint Infections.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSite-specific content configuration of vendor-based Electronic Health Records (EHRs) is a vital step in the development of standardized and interoperable content that can be used for clinical decision-support, reporting, care coordination, and information exchange. The multi-site, multi-stakeholder Acute Care Documentation (ACD) project at Partners Healthcare Systems (PHS) aimed to develop highly structured clinical content with adequate breadth and depth to meet the needs of all types of acute care clinicians at two academic medical centers. The Knowledge Management (KM) team at PHS led the informatics and knowledge management effort for the project.
objectivesWe aimed to evaluate the role, governance, and project management processes and resources for the KM team's effort as part of the standardized clinical content creation.
methodsWe employed the Center for Disease Control's six step Program Evaluation Framework to guide our evaluation steps. We administered a forty-four question, open-ended, semi-structured voluntary survey to gather focused, credible evidence from members of the KM team. Qualitative open-coding was performed to identify themes for lessons learned and concluding recommendations.
resultsSix surveys were completed. Qualitative data analysis informed five lessons learned and thirty specific recommendations associated with the lessons learned. The five lessons learned are: 1) Assess and meet knowledge needs and set expectations at the start of the project; 2) Define an accountable decision-making process; 3) Increase team meeting moderation skills; 4) Ensure adequate resources and competency training with online asynchronous collaboration tools; 5) Develop focused, goal-oriented teams and supportive, consultative service based teams.
conclusionsKnowledge management requirements for the development of standardized clinical content within a vendor-based EHR among multi-stakeholder teams and sites include: 1) assessing and meeting informatics knowledge needs, 2) setting expectations and standardizing the process for decision-making, and 3) ensuring the availability of adequate resources and competency training.
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.