ArticleNursing administration quarterly
Postimplementation Evaluation of a Machine Learning-Based Deterioration Risk Alert to Enhance Sepsis Outcome Improvements.
Article in Nursing administration quarterly. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Information displays for automated surveillance algorithms of in-hospital patient deterioration: a scoping review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2023Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Machine learning-based early warning systems (EWSs) can detect clinical deterioration more accurately than point-score tools. In patients with sepsis, however, the timing and scope of sepsis interventions relative to an advanced EWS alert are not well understood. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the timing and frequency of fluid bolus therapy, new antibiotics, and Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) status relative to the time of an advanced EWS alert. We conducted 2 rounds of chart reviews of patients with an EWS alert admitted to community hospitals of a large integrated health system in Northern California (round 1: n = 21; round 2: n = 47). We abstracted patient characteristics and process measures of sepsis intervention and performed summary statistics. Sepsis decedents were older and sicker at admission and alert time. Most EWS alerts occurred near admission, and most sepsis interventions occurred before the first alert. Of 14 decedents, 12 (86%) had a DNR order before death. Fluid bolus therapy and new intravenous antibiotics frequently occurred before the alert, suggesting a potential overlap between sepsis care in the emergency department and the first alert following admission. Two tactics to minimize alerts that may not motivate new sepsis interventions are (1) locking out the alert during the immediate time after hospital admission; and (2) triaging and reviewing patients with alerts outside of the unit before activating a bedside response. Some decedents may have been on a palliative/end-of-life trajectory, because DNR orders were very common among decedents. Nurse leaders sponsoring or leading machine learning projects should consider tactics to reduce false-positive and clinically meaningless alerts dispatched to clinical staff.
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.