Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34470056›Full record

ArticleApplied clinical informatics2021

Leveraging American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Guidelines for Point-of-Care Decision Support in Obstetrics.

Brittany H Sanford, Gabriel Labbad, Alyssa R Hersh, Aya Heshmat, Steve Hasley

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied clinical informatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Brittany H SanfordDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Women's Health, Albert Einstein College of Medicine/Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York, United States.
Gabriel LabbadThe Center for Clinical Informatics Research and Education and Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The MetroHealth System, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, United States.
Alyssa R HershDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon, United States.
Aya HeshmatDepartment of Health IT and Clinical Informatics, American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Washington, District of Columbia, United States.
Steve HasleyDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology & Reproductive Sciences, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States.
American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists · USMetroHealth Medical Center · USMontefiore Medical Center · USOregon Health & Science University · USUniversity of Pittsburgh Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) provides numerous narrative documents containing formal recommendations and additional narrative guidance within the text. These guidelines are not intended to provide a complete "care pathway" for patient management, but these elements of guidance can be useful for clinical decision support (CDS) in obstetrical and gynecologic care and could be exposed within electronic health records (EHRs). Unfortunately, narrative guidelines do not easily translate into computable CDS guidance.

objectiveThis study aimed to describe a method of translating ACOG clinical guidance into clear, implementable items associated with specific obstetrical problems for integration into the EHR.

methodsTo translate ACOG clinical guidance in Obstetrics into implementable CDS, we followed a set of steps including selection of documents, establishing a problem list, extraction and classification of recommendations, and assigning tasks to those recommendations.

resultsOur search through ACOG clinical guidelines produced over 500 unique documents. After exclusions, and counting only sources relevant to obstetrics, we used 245 documents: 38 practice bulletins, 113 committee opinions, 16 endorsed publications, 1 practice advisory, 2 task force and work group reports, 2 patient education, 2 obstetric care consensus, 60 frequently asked questions (FAQ), 1 women's health care guidelines, 1 Prolog series, and 9 others (non-ACOG). Recommendations were classified as actionable (

conclusionWe described a methodology of translating ACOG narrative into a semi-structured format that can be more easily applied as CDS in the EHR. We believe this work can contribute to developing a library of information within ACOG that can be continually updated and disseminated to EHR systems for the most optimal decision support. We will continue documenting our process in developing executable code for decision support.

Indexed as

ObstetricsFemaleHumansPoint-of-Care SystemsPregnancyResearch DesignUnited States

Identifiers

PMID34470056
PMCPMC8410237
OpenAlexW3198641852

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.