ArticleJAMIA open2022
Implementation approaches and barriers for rule-based and machine learning-based sepsis risk prediction tools: a qualitative study.
Article in JAMIA open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
31 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.
- Implementation of Machine Learning Applications in Health Care Organizations: Systematic Review of Empirical Studies.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Pooled it
- Health Care Professionals' Experience of Using AI: Systematic Review With Narrative Synthesis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Pooled it
- Implementing AI in Hospitals to Achieve a Learning Health System: Systematic Review of Current Enablers and Barriers.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Pooled it
- Deployment of machine learning algorithms to predict sepsis: systematic review and application of the SALIENT clinical AI implementation framework.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2023Pooled it
- Stakeholder Perspectives of Clinical Artificial Intelligence Implementation: Systematic Review of Qualitative Evidence.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Pooled it
- Systematic review of externally validated machine learning models for predicting acute kidney injury in general hospital patients.Frontiers in nephrology · 2023Pooled it
- Real-World Barriers to and Facilitators of Implementing AI-Based Clinical Decision Support Systems: Scoping Review.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- How Can Clinicians Decide if AI-Enabled Risk Prediction Models Are Fit for Purpose for Real World Use?Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2026Article
- Bias and Fairness Across the Healthcare AI Lifecycle: A Clinician-Oriented Review.Balkan medical journal · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence to Facilitate SEP-1 Measure Compliance and Fluid Management in Sepsis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Perceived Potential and Challenges of Supporting Coronary Artery Disease Treatment Decisions With AI: Qualitative Study.JMIR cardio · 2026Article
- Patient Benefits in the Context of Sepsis-Related AI-Based Clinical Decision Support Systems: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence for Cardiovascular Care in Action: From Learning to Implementation in Health Systems.JACC. Advances · 2025Review
- Health Care Providers' Perspectives of Clinical Decision Support Tools for Pediatric Sepsis in Bangladesh: Qualitative Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Usability and adoption in a randomized trial of GutGPT a GenAI tool for gastrointestinal bleeding.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Can we predict the future of respiratory failure prediction?Critical care (London, England) · 2025Review
- Barriers and facilitators to optimal sepsis care - a systematized review of healthcare professionals' perspectives.BMC health services research · 2025Review
- SepsisJournal of medical microbiology · 2025Review
- User-Oriented Requirements for Artificial Intelligence-Based Clinical Decision Support Systems in Sepsis: Protocol for a Multimethod Research Project.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- The Complete Blood Count Sepsis Index Using Monocyte Distribution Width for Early Detection of Sepsis in Patients Without Obvious Signs.Critical care explorations · 2025Observational
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Many options are currently available for sepsis surveillance clinical decision support (CDS) from electronic medical record (EMR) vendors, third party, and homegrown models drawing on rule-based (RB) and machine learning (ML) algorithms. This study explores sepsis CDS implementation from the perspective of implementation leads by describing the motivations, tool choices, and implementation experiences of a diverse group of implementers. Materials and Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with and a questionnaire was administered to 21 hospital leaders overseeing CDS implementation at 15 US medical centers. Participants were recruited via convenience sampling. Responses were coded by 2 coders with consensus approach and inductively analyzed for themes. Results: Use of sepsis CDS is motivated in part by quality metrics for sepsis patients. Choice of tool is driven by ease of integration, customization capability, and perceived predictive potential. Implementation processes for these CDS tools are complex, time-consuming, interdisciplinary undertakings resulting in heterogeneous choice of tools and workflow integration. To improve clinician acceptance, implementers addressed both optimization of the alerts as well as clinician understanding and buy in. More distrust and confusion was reported for ML models, as compared to RB models. Respondents described a variety of approaches to overcome implementation barriers; these approaches related to alert firing, content, integration, and buy-in. Discussion: While there are shared socio-technical challenges of implementing CDS for both RB and ML models, attention to user education, support, expectation management, and dissemination of effective practices may improve feasibility and effectiveness of ML models in quality improvement efforts. Conclusion: Further implementation science research is needed to determine real world efficacy of these tools. Clinician acceptance is a significant barrier to sepsis CDS implementation. Successful implementation of less clinically intuitive ML models may require additional attention to user confusion and distrust.
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.