ArticlePediatric quality & safety
Impact of a Clinical Decision Support Alert on Informed Consent Documentation in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit.
Article in Pediatric quality & safety. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Improving Discrete Documentation of Cancer Staging-An Alert-Free Approach.Applied clinical informatics · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Informed consent is necessary to preserve patient autonomy and shared decision-making, yet compliant consent documentation is suboptimal in the intensive care unit (ICU). We aimed to increase compliance with bundled consent documentation, which provides consent for a predefined set of common procedures in the neonatal ICU from 0% to 50% over 1 year. Methods: We used the Plan-Do-Study-Act model for quality improvement. Interventions included education and performance awareness, delineation of the preferred consenting process, consent form revision, overlay tool creation, and clinical decision support (CDS) alert use within the electronic health record. Monthly audits categorized consent forms as missing, present but noncompliant, or compliant. We analyzed consent compliance on a run chart using standard run chart interpretation rules and obtained feedback on the CDS as a countermeasure. Results: We conducted 564 audits over 37 months. Overall, median consent compliance increased from 0% to 86.6%. Upon initiating the CDS alert, we observed the highest monthly compliance of 93.3%, followed by a decrease to 33.3% with an inadvertent discontinuation of the CDS. Compliance subsequently increased to 73.3% after the restoration of the alert. We created a consultant opt-out selection to address negative feedback associated with CDS. There were no missing consent forms within the last 7 months of monitoring. Conclusions: A multi-faceted approach led to sustained improvement in bundled consent documentation compliance in our neonatal intensive care unit, with the direct contribution of the CDS observed. A CDS intervention directed at the informed consenting process may similarly benefit other ICUs.
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.