Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35646244›Full record

ArticleKansas journal of medicine2022

Improving Stewardship of

Joseph Joslin, Elizabeth Ablah, Hayrettin Okut, Lauren Bricker, Maha Assi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Kansas journal of medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Joseph JoslinUniversity of Kansas School of Medicine-Wichita, Wichita, KS.
Elizabeth AblahDepartment of Population Health, University of Kansas School of Medicine-Wichita, Wichita, KS.
Hayrettin OkutDepartment of Population Health, University of Kansas School of Medicine-Wichita, Wichita, KS.
Lauren BrickerAscension Via Christi Hospitals, University of Kansas School of Medicine-Wichita, Wichita, KS.
Maha AssiDepartment of Internal Medicine.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Modern laboratory techniques cannot differentiate between Methods: At AVCH, the three study periods were compared: baseline with algorithm training only, the EMR intervention, and the EMR intervention with additional phone calls (EMR with phone calls). Data were abstracted from the hospital EMR. Results: A total of 311 charts were reviewed. Adherence to the algorithm increased from 34% at baseline to 52% after the EMR intervention (p = 0.010). During the EMR with phone calls period, more tests were discontinued (87%; n = 39) compared to baseline (54%; n = 15) and EMR (54%; n = 15; p = 0.003). The HO-CDI rate ranged from 8.5 cases per 10,000 patient-days at baseline, to 7.9 during EMR, to 4.0 during EMR with phone calls (p = 0.007). Conclusions: The EMR and EMR with phone call interventions were associated with a significant decrease in the HO-CDI rate and an increase in provider adherence to the algorithm.

Indexed as

algorithmsClostridioides diflcileelectronic medical recordsnosocomial infectionretrospective studies

Identifiers

PMID35646244
PMCPMC9110055

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.