ReviewYearbook of medical informatics2019
Contributions on Clinical Decision Support from the 2018 Literature.
Review in Yearbook of medical informatics, 2019. 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.
- Knowledge Graph-Enhanced Deep Learning Model (H-SYSTEM) for Hypertensive Intracerebral Hemorrhage: Model Development and Validation.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- An Interoperable Machine Learning Pipeline for Pediatric Obesity Risk Estimation.Proceedings of machine learning research · 2024Article
- Pragmatic Considerations on Clinical Decision Support from the 2019 Literature.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2020Review
- An Integrated Process for Co-Developing and Implementing Written and Computable Clinical Practice Guidelines.American journal of medical quality : the official journal of the American College of Medical QualityArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo summarize recent research and select the best papers published in 2018 in the field of computerized clinical decision support for the Decision Support section of the International Medical Informatics Association (IMIA) yearbook.
methodsA literature review was performed by searching two bibliographic databases for papers referring to clinical decision support systems (CDSSs). The aim was to identify a list of candidate best papers from the retrieved bibliographic records, which were then peer-reviewed by external reviewers. A consensus meeting of the IMIA editorial team finally selected the best papers on the basis of all reviews and the section editors' evaluation.
resultsAmong 1,148 retrieved articles, 15 best paper candidates were selected, the review of which resulted in the selection of four best papers. The first paper introduces a deep learning model for estimating short-term life expectancy (>3 months) of metastatic cancer patients by analyzing free-text clinical notes in electronic medical records, while maintaining the temporal visit sequence. The second paper takes note that CDSSs become routinely integrated in health information systems and compares statistical anomaly detection models to identify CDSS malfunctions which, if remain unnoticed, may have a negative impact on care delivery. The third paper fairly reports on lessons learnt from the development of an oncology CDSS using artificial intelligence techniques and from its assessment in a large US cancer center. The fourth paper implements a preference learning methodology for detecting inconsistencies in clinical practice guidelines and illustrates the applicability of the proposed methodology to antibiotherapy.
conclusionsThree of the four best papers rely on data-driven methods, and one builds on a knowledge-based approach. While there is currently a trend for data-driven decision support, the promising results of such approaches still need to be confirmed by the adoption of these systems and their routine use.
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.