Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35109916›Full record

ArticleImplementation science communications2022

Implementing an electronic health record dashboard for safe anticoagulant management: learning from qualitative interviews with existing and potential users to develop an implementation process.

Geoffrey D Barnes, Emily Sippola, Allison Ranusch, Linda Takamine, Michael Lanham, Michael Dorsch, Anne Sales, Jeremy Sussman

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science communications, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Geoffrey D BarnesFrankel Cardiovascular Center, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, 2800 Plymouth Rd, B14 G214, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109-2800, USA. gbarnes@umich.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6532-8440
Emily SippolaCenter for Behavioral and Social Sciences in Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA.
Allison RanuschCenter for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor Veterans Health Affairs, Ann Arbor, USA.
Linda TakamineCenter for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor Veterans Health Affairs, Ann Arbor, USA.
Michael LanhamDepartment of Learning Health Sciences, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA.
Michael DorschInstitute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA.
Anne SalesInstitute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA.
Jeremy SussmanInstitute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA.
University of Michigan · USVA Center for Clinical Management Research · US

Funding

Research BaseP30DK092926 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI MARY ELLEN MICHELE HEISLER, ADESUWA B OLOMU · 2011 to 2026
$10.0M
Improving Safe Use of Direct Oral Anticoagulants: A Population Health ApproachR18HS026874 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI BARNES, GEOFFREY DOUGLAS · 2020 to 2022
$1.5M
AHRQ HHS R18HS026874NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK092926
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFacilitating appropriate care delivery using electronic health record (digital health) tools is increasing. However, frequently used determinants frameworks seldom address key barriers for technology-associated implementation.

methodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted in two contexts: the national Veterans Health Affairs (VA) following implementation of an electronic dashboard, a population health tool, and the Michigan Anticoagulation Quality Improvement Initiative (MAQI

resultsAmong 45 interviewees (32 in VA, 13 in MAQI

conclusionsThe successful implementation of electronic health record tools requires unique considerations that differ from other types of implementation, must account for the status of implementation, and should address the effects of the tool deployment on clinical staff authority and autonomy. Interviewing both post-implementation and pre-implementation users can provide a robust understanding of implementation determinants.

Indexed as

AnticoagulationImplementationPharmacistPopulation health

Identifiers

PMID35109916
PMCPMC8812192
OpenAlexW4210257302

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.