Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27570216›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2017

Variation in high-priority drug-drug interaction alerts across institutions and electronic health records.

Dustin S McEvoy, Dean F Sittig, Thu-Trang Hickman, Skye Aaron, Angela Ai, Mary Amato, David W Bauer, Gregory M Fraser, Jeremy Harper, Angela Kennemer and 13 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Evaluation of an electronic health record Drug Interaction Customization Editor (DICE).American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Improving the specificity of drug-drug interaction alerts: Can it be done?American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists · 2022
    Article
  14. Potential Drug Interactions Between Psychotropics and Intravenous Chemotherapeutics Used by Patients With Cancer.The Journal of pharmacy technology : jPT : official publication of the Association of Pharmacy Technicians · 2022
    Article
  15. Clinician collaboration to improve clinical decision support: the Clickbusters initiative.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

23 authors.

Dustin S McEvoyPartners Healthcare, Wellesley, Massachusetts, USA.
Dean F SittigSchool of Biomedical Informatics, University of Texas Health Science Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Thu-Trang HickmanDivision of General Internal Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Skye AaronDivision of General Internal Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Angela AiDivision of General Internal Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Mary AmatoMassachusetts College of Pharmacy and Health Science, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
David W BauerMemorial Hermann Health System, Houston, USA.
Gregory M FraserWVP Health Authority, Salem, Oregon, USA.
Jeremy HarperDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Angela KennemerMemorial Hermann Health System, Houston, USA.
Michael A KrallThe Permanente Federation, Portland, Oregon, USA.
Christoph U LehmannDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.
Sameer MalhotraDepartment of Healthcare Policy and Research, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York City, New York, USA.
Daniel R MurphyCenter for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness, and Safety, Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Brandi O'KelleyWomen's Health Specialists of Saint Louis, Saint Louis, Missouri, USA.
Lipika SamalDivision of General Internal Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Richard SchreiberDepartment of Internal Medicine, Holy Spirit Hospital - A Geisinger Affiliate, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, USA.
Hardeep SinghCenter for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness, and Safety, Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Eric J ThomasMemorial Hermann Health System, Houston, USA.
Carl V VartianHospital Corporation of America Gulf Coast Division, Houston, Texas, USA.
Jennifer WestmorlandMemorial Hermann Health System, Houston, USA.
Allison B McCoySchool of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA.
Adam WrightPartners Healthcare, Wellesley, Massachusetts, USA.

Funding

Improving clinical decision support reliability using anomaly detection methodsR01LM011966 · NLM · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI WRIGHT, ADAM T · 2014 to 2017
$2.4M
Health Information Technology for Chronic Kidney Disease ManagementK23DK097187 · NIDDK · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI SAMAL, LIPIKA · 2013 to 2017
$920k
NIDDK NIH HHS K23 DK097187NLM NIH HHS R01 LM011966
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: The United States Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology sponsored the development of a "high-priority" list of drug-drug interactions (DDIs) to be used for clinical decision support. We assessed current adoption of this list and current alerting practice for these DDIs with regard to alert implementation (presence or absence of an alert) and display (alert appearance as interruptive or passive). Materials and methods: We conducted evaluations of electronic health records (EHRs) at a convenience sample of health care organizations across the United States using a standardized testing protocol with simulated orders. Results: Evaluations of 19 systems were conducted at 13 sites using 14 different EHRs. Across systems, 69% of the high-priority DDI pairs produced alerts. Implementation and display of the DDI alerts tested varied between systems, even when the same EHR vendor was used. Across the drug pairs evaluated, implementation and display of DDI alerts differed, ranging from 27% (4/15) to 93% (14/15) implementation. Discussion: Currently, there is no standard of care covering which DDI alerts to implement or how to display them to providers. Opportunities to improve DDI alerting include using differential displays based on DDI severity, establishing improved lists of clinically significant DDIs, and thoroughly reviewing organizational implementation decisions regarding DDIs. Conclusion: DDI alerting is clinically important but not standardized. There is significant room for improvement and standardization around evidence-based DDIs.

Indexed as

Drug InteractionsData DisplayElectronic Health RecordsHumansMedical Order Entry SystemsMedical Records Systems, ComputerizedUnited Statesclinical decision supportdrug-drug interactionselectronic health records

Identifiers

PMID27570216
PMCPMC5391726

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.