ArticlePerspectives in health information managemen2019
The Expanding Role of Clinical Documentation Improvement Programs in Research and Analytics.
Article in Perspectives in health information managemen, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Findings from the Health Information Management Section of the 2020 International Medical Informatics Association Yearbook.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2020Pooled it
- Noninterruptive tool to support provider malnutrition documentation and minimize documentation queries.JAMIA open · 2025Article
- Resident integration with inpatient clinical documentation improvement: a quality improvement project.BMJ open quality · 2022Article
- Measuring case severity: a novel tool for benchmarking and clinical documentation improvement.BMC health services research · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The future of clinical documentation improvement (CDI) will require expanding the reach of CDI programs into new areas of expertise because the traditional realms of CDI work are increasingly becoming automated. CDI-based research and analytics can serve as a means for demonstrating continued value to an institution. We present four studies as examples of these efforts. We explored the use of claims data to determine whether a clinical condition meets the criteria for a secondary diagnosis and to evaluate whether a clinical problem should be elevated to the status of a comorbid or complicating condition. We demonstrated a way in which CDI professionals can evaluate the impacts of changes in clinical definitions, and we explored how CDI can work with other institutional programs to decrease length of stay. We believe that these models may serve as a springboard within institutions and among the larger CDI community to make research and analytics a foundation of future CDI activities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30766455PMC6341414What 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.