Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24081019›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA

Content and functional specifications for a standards-based multidisciplinary rounding tool to maintain continuity across acute and critical care.

Sarah Collins, Ann C Hurley, Frank Y Chang, Anisha R Illa, Angela Benoit, Sarah Laperle, Patricia C Dykes

Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract read
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. It is linked to trial NCT03911687 (Communicating Narrative Concerns Entered by RNs), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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.

NCT03911687 nacompletednot on this map

Communicating Narrative Concerns Entered by RNs (CONCERN) Clinical Decision Support (CDS) System

TypeinterventionalSponsorColumbia UniversityRan2020 to 2022Enrolled60,893ConditionsHospital Acquired ConditionArmsCONCERN CDS system notification
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Sarah CollinsClinical Informatics Partners eCare, Partners Healthcare, Wellesley, Massachusetts, USA.
Ann C Hurley
Frank Y Chang
Anisha R Illa
Angela Benoit
Sarah Laperle
Patricia C Dykes
Mass General Brigham · USBrigham and Women's Hospital · USHarvard University · USMGH Institute of Health Professions · US

Funding

NCATS NIH HHS L30 TR000465
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMaintaining continuity of care (CoC) in the inpatient setting is dependent on aligning goals and tasks with the plan of care (POC) during multidisciplinary rounds (MDRs). A number of locally developed rounding tools exist, yet there is a lack of standard content and functional specifications for electronic tools to support MDRs within and across settings.

objectiveTo identify content and functional requirements for an MDR tool to support CoC. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe collected discrete clinical data elements (CDEs) discussed during rounds for 128 acute and critical care patients. To capture CDEs, we developed and validated an iPad-based observational tool based on informatics CoC standards. We observed 19 days of rounds and conducted eight group and individual interviews. Descriptive and bivariate statistics and network visualization were conducted to understand associations between CDEs discussed during rounds with a particular focus on the POC. Qualitative data were thematically analyzed. All analyses were triangulated.

resultsWe identified the need for universal and configurable MDR tool views across settings and users and the provision of messaging capability. Eleven empirically derived universal CDEs were identified, including four POC CDEs: problems, plan, goals, and short-term concerns. Configurable POC CDEs were: rationale, tasks/'to dos', pending results and procedures, discharge planning, patient preferences, need for urgent review, prognosis, and advice/guidance. DISCUSSION: Some requirements differed between settings; yet, there was overlap between POC CDEs.

conclusionsWe recommend an initial list of 11 universal CDEs for continuity in MDRs across settings and 27 CDEs that can be configured to meet setting-specific needs.

Indexed as

Computer GraphicsContinuity of Patient CareCritical CareData CollectionElectronic Health RecordsFeasibility StudiesHumansIntensive Care UnitsPatient Care TeamPatient-Centered CarePatient ParticipationTeaching RoundsWorkforceAcute CareContinuity of CareCritical CareEHRsMultidisciplinary RoundsPlan of Care

Identifiers

PMID24081019
PMCPMC3994860
OpenAlexW2168330473

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.