ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2017
Evaluating the Effectiveness of Auditing Rules for Electronic Health Record Systems.
Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2017. 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.
- Dobbs and the future of health data privacy for patients and healthcare organizations.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022Article
- Amplifying Domain Expertise in Clinical Data Pipelines.JMIR medical informatics · 2020Article
- [Clinical characteristics and prognosis of 56 multiple myeloma patients over 70 years of age complicated with other systemic diseases].Zhonghua xue ye xue za zhi = Zhonghua xueyexue zazhi · 2018Article
- De facto diagnosis specialties: Recognition and discovery.Learning health systems · 2018Article
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
Abstract
Healthcare organizations (HCOs) often deploy rule-based auditing systems to detect insider threats to sensitive patient health information in electronic health record (EHR) systems. These rule-based systems define behavior deemed to be high-risk a priori (e.g., family member, co-worker access). While such rules seem logical, there has been little scientific investigation into the effectiveness of these auditing rules in identifying inappropriate behavior. Thus, in this paper, we introduce an approach to evaluate the effectiveness of individual high-risk rules and rank them according to their potential risk. We investigate the rate of high-risk access patterns and minimum rate of high-risk accesses that can be explained with appropriate clinical reasons in a large EHR system. An analysis of 8M accesses from one-week of data shows that specific high-risk flags occur more frequently than theoretically expected and the rate at which accesses can be explained away with five simple reasons is 16 - 43%.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29854153PMC5977720What 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.