ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2019
Development and Evaluation of Novel Electronic Medical Record Tools For Avoiding Bleeding After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Supporting Decisions or Decision Support? Challenges of Achieving Meaningful Clinical Decision Support in the Modern Era of the Electronic Health Record.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2019Article
- Development and Evaluation of Novel Electronic Medical Record Tools For Avoiding Bleeding After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background Bleeding remains the most common complication of percutaneous coronary intervention. Guidelines recommend assessing bleeding risk before percutaneous coronary intervention to target use of bleeding avoidance strategies and mitigate bleeding events. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center undertook an initiative to integrate these recommendations into the electronic medical record. Methods and Results The intervention included a voluntary clinical decision alert to assess bleeding risk before percutaneous coronary intervention, a bleeding risk calculator tool based on the NCDR (National Cardiovascular Data Registry) risk prediction model and, when indicated, a second alert to consider 4 bleeding avoidance strategies. We tested for changes in the use of bleeding avoidance strategies and bleeding event rates by comparing procedures performed before versus after implementation of the electronic medical record-based intervention and with versus without use of the bleeding risk calculator tool. Use of radial access increased (47.6% versus 64.8%;
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.