Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30194058›Full record

SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2018

Clinical Decision Support Systems for Drug Allergy Checking: Systematic Review.

Laura Légat, Sven Van Laere, Marc Nyssen, Stephane Steurbaut, Alain G Dupont, Pieter Cornu

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of medical Internet research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
14.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

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

46 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 90 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Alert fatigue measurement in clinical decision support: a systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Tackling medication errors: how a systems approach improves patient safety.European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Laura Légat *Research Group Clinical Pharmacology and Clinical Pharmacy, Centre for Pharmaceutical Research, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-1778-3366
Sven Van Laere *Research Group of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, Department of Public Health, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-8474-9729
Marc NyssenResearch Group of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, Department of Public Health, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-6373-3821
Stephane SteurbautResearch Group Clinical Pharmacology and Clinical Pharmacy, Centre for Pharmaceutical Research, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-4586-6919
Alain G DupontResearch Group Clinical Pharmacology and Clinical Pharmacy, Centre for Pharmaceutical Research, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-9403-0494
Pieter CornuResearch Group Clinical Pharmacology and Clinical Pharmacy, Centre for Pharmaceutical Research, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-4802-0241
Vrije Universiteit Brussel · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWorldwide, the burden of allergies-in particular, drug allergies-is growing. In the process of prescribing, dispensing, or administering a drug, a medication error may occur and can have adverse consequences; for example, a drug may be given to a patient with a documented allergy to that particular drug. Computerized physician order entry (CPOE) systems with built-in clinical decision support systems (CDSS) have the potential to prevent such medication errors and adverse events.

objectiveThe aim of this review is to provide a comprehensive overview regarding all aspects of CDSS for drug allergy, including documenting, coding, rule bases, alerts and alert fatigue, and outcome evaluation.

methodsThe Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed as much as possible and searches were conducted in 5 databases using CPOE, CDSS, alerts, and allergic or allergy as keywords. Bias could not be evaluated according to PRISMA guidelines due to the heterogeneity of study types included in the review.

resultsOf the 3160 articles considered, 60 met the inclusion criteria. A further 9 articles were added based on expert opinion, resulting in a total of 69 articles. An interrater agreement of 90.9% with a reliability Κ=.787 (95% CI 0.686-0.888) was reached. Large heterogeneity across study objectives, study designs, study populations, and reported results was found. Several key findings were identified. Evidence of the usefulness of clinical decision support for drug allergies has been documented. Nevertheless, there are some important problems associated with their use. Accurate and structured documenting of information on drug allergies in electronic health records (EHRs) is difficult, as it is often not clear to healthcare providers how and where to document drug allergies. Besides the underreporting of drug allergies, outdated or inaccurate drug allergy information in EHRs poses an important problem. Research on the use of coding terminologies for documenting drug allergies is sparse. There is no generally accepted standard terminology for structured documentation of allergy information. The final key finding is the consistently reported low specificity of drug allergy alerts. Current systems have high alert override rates of up to 90%, leading to alert fatigue. Important challenges remain for increasing the specificity of drug allergy alerts. We found only one study specifically reporting outcomes related to CDSS for drug allergies. It showed that adverse drug events resulting from overridden drug allergy alerts do not occur frequently.

conclusionsAccurate and comprehensive recording of drug allergies is required for good use of CDSS for drug allergy screening. We found considerable variation in the way drug allergy are recorded in EHRs. It remains difficult to reduce drug allergy alert overload while maintaining patient safety as the highest priority. Future research should focus on improving alert specificity, thereby reducing override rates and alert fatigue. Also, the effect on patient outcomes and cost-effectiveness should be evaluated.

Indexed as

Decision Support Systems, ClinicalDrug HypersensitivityHumansReproducibility of Resultsalertclinical decision support systemscomputerized physician order entrydrug allergypatient safety

Identifiers

PMID30194058
PMCPMC6231757
OpenAlexW2809239485

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.