ArticleBMJ open2017
Development and validation of hospital information system-generated indicators of the appropriateness of oral anticoagulant prescriptions in hospitalised adults: the PACHA study protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02898090 (Development and Validation of Indicators on the Appropriateness of Oral Anticoagulant Prescriptions in Adult Medicine Automated From the Hospital Information System), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Development and Validation of Indicators on the Appropriateness of Oral Anticoagulant Prescriptions in Adult Medicine Automated From the Hospital Information System (PACHA Study).
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Construction and Clinical Application Effect of General Surgery Patient-Oriented Nursing Information Platform Using Cloud Computing.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe appropriateness of oral anticoagulant prescriptions is a major challenge to improve quality and safety of care. As indicators of the appropriateness of oral anticoagulant prescriptions are lacking, the aim of the study is to develop and validate a panel of such indicators, in hospitalised adults, from the hospital information system of two university hospitals in France. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study will be carried out in four steps: (1) a literature review to identify indicators of the appropriateness of oral anticoagulant prescriptions and their conditions of appropriateness; (2) a Delphi consensus method to assess the potential utility and operational implementation of the selected indicators; (3) techniques of medical data search to implement indicators from the hospital information system and; (4) a cross-sectional study to assess the ability of indicators to detect inappropriate oral anticoagulant prescriptions, performance of medical data search techniques for tracking or retrieving information and the ability of tools to be transferred into other institutions. The fourth step will include up to 80 patient hospital stays for each indicator, depending on the prevalence of inappropriate prescriptions estimated in interim analyses. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This work addresses the current lack of quality indicators of the appropriateness of oral anticoagulant prescriptions. We aim to develop and validate such indicators for integrating them into hospital clinical practice, as part of a structured approach to improve quality and safety of care. As each hospital information system is different, we will propose tools transferable to other healthcare institutions to allow an automated construction of these indicators. The PACHA study protocol was approved by institutional review boards and ethics committees (CPP Sud-Ouest et Outre Mer III-DC 2016/119; CPP Ile-de-France II-CDW_2016_0014). REGISTRATION DETAILS: Clinical Trial.gov registration: NCT02898090.
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.