ArticleAdministration and policy in mental health2024
Getting More Out of Clinical Documentation: Can Clinical Dashboards Yield Clinically Useful Information?
Article in Administration and policy in mental health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigated coded data retrieved from clinical dashboards, which are decision-support tools that include a graphical display of clinical progress and clinical activities. Data were extracted from clinical dashboards representing 256 youth (M age = 11.9) from 128 practitioners who were trained in the Managing and Adapting Practice (MAP) system (Chorpita & Daleiden in BF Chorpita EL Daleiden 2014 Structuring the collaboration of science and service in pursuit of a shared vision. 43(2):323 338. 2014, Chorpita & Daleiden in BF Chorpita EL Daleiden 2018 Coordinated strategic action: Aspiring to wisdom in mental health service systems. 25(4):e12264. 2018) in 55 agencies across 5 regional mental health systems. Practitioners labeled up to 35 fields (i.e., descriptions of clinical activities), with the options of drawing from a controlled vocabulary or writing in a client-specific activity. Practitioners then noted when certain activities occurred during the episode of care. Fields from the extracted data were coded and reliability was assessed for Field Type, Practice Element Type, Target Area, and Audience (e.g., Caregiver Psychoeducation: Anxiety would be coded as Field Type = Practice Element; Practice Element Type = Psychoeducation; Target Area = Anxiety; Audience = Caregiver). Coders demonstrated moderate to almost perfect interrater reliability. On average, practitioners recorded two activities per session, and clients had 10 unique activities across all their sessions. Results from multilevel models showed that clinical activity characteristics and sessions accounted for the most variance in the occurrence, recurrence, and co-occurrence of clinical activities, with relatively less variance accounted for by practitioners, clients, and regional systems. Findings are consistent with patterns of practice reported in other studies and suggest that clinical dashboards may be a useful source of clinical information. More generally, the use of a controlled vocabulary for clinical activities appears to increase the retrievability and actionability of healthcare information and thus sets the stage for advancing the utility of clinical documentation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38261119What 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.