ArticleJAMIA open2020
ClinicNet: machine learning for personalized clinical order set recommendations.
Article in JAMIA open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- GPCR systems coordinate cellular resilience against aging-associated stress.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2026Review
- Evaluating the Prevalence of Burnout Among Health Care Professionals Related to Electronic Health Record Use: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JMIR medical informatics · 2024Review
- Graph-based clinical recommender: Predicting specialists procedure orders using graph representation learning.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2023Article
- A Data-Driven Algorithm to Recommend Initial Clinical Workup for Outpatient Specialty Referral: Algorithm Development and Validation Using Electronic Health Record Data and Expert Surveys.JMIR medical informatics · 2022Article
- GPCRs Are Optimal Regulators of Complex Biological Systems and Orchestrate the Interface between Health and Disease.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
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
objectiveThis study assesses whether neural networks trained on electronic health record (EHR) data can anticipate what individual clinical orders and existing institutional order set templates clinicians will use more accurately than existing decision support tools. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe process 57 624 patients worth of clinical event EHR data from 2008 to 2014. We train a feed-forward neural network (ClinicNet) and logistic regression applied to the traditional problem structure of predicting individual clinical items as well as our proposed workflow of predicting existing institutional order set template usage.
resultsClinicNet predicts individual clinical orders (precision = 0.32, recall = 0.47) better than existing institutional order sets (precision = 0.15, recall = 0.46). The ClinicNet model predicts clinician usage of existing institutional order sets (avg. precision = 0.31) with higher average precision than a baseline of order set usage frequencies (avg. precision = 0.20) or a logistic regression model (avg. precision = 0.12). DISCUSSION: Machine learning methods can predict clinical decision-making patterns with greater accuracy and less manual effort than existing static order set templates. This can streamline existing clinical workflows, but may not fit if historical clinical ordering practices are incorrect. For this reason, manually authored content such as order set templates remain valuable for the purposeful design of care pathways. ClinicNet's capability of predicting such personalized order set templates illustrates the potential of combining both top-down and bottom-up approaches to delivering clinical decision support content.
conclusionClinicNet illustrates the capability for machine learning methods applied to the EHR to anticipate both individual clinical orders and existing order set templates, which has the potential to improve upon current standards of practice in clinical order entry.
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.