Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38699649›Full record

ArticleJAMIA open2024

A common data model for the standardization of intensive care unit medication features.

Andrea Sikora, Kelli Keats, David J Murphy, John W Devlin, Susan E Smith, Brian Murray, Mitchell S Buckley, Sandra Rowe, Lindsey Coppiano, Rishikesan Kamaleswaran

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMIA open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

10 authors.

Andrea SikoraDepartment of Clinical and Administrative Pharmacy, University of Georgia College of Pharmacy, Augusta, GA 30912, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2020-0571
Kelli KeatsDepartment of Pharmacy, Augusta University Medical Center, Augusta, GA 30912, United States.
David J MurphyDivision of Pulmonary, Allergy, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322, United States.
John W DevlinNortheastern University School of Pharmacy, Boston, MA 02115, United States.
Susan E SmithDepartment of Clinical and Administrative Pharmacy, University of Georgia College of Pharmacy, Athens, GA 30601, United States.
Brian MurrayDepartment of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina Medical Center, Chapel Hill, NC 27514, United States.
Mitchell S BuckleyDepartment of Pharmacy, Banner University Medical Center Phoenix, Phoenix, AZ 85032, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3385-8105
Sandra RoweDepartment of Pharmacy, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR 97239, United States.
Lindsey CoppianoDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30322, United States.
Rishikesan KamaleswaranDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30322, United States.

Funding

Re-Entry Supplement: Investigation of Oral Microbial Enzymes for the Detection and Treatment of Periodontal DiseaseUL1TR002489 · NCATS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI BUSE, JOHN BERNARD, SHAHEEN, NICHOLAS J · 2018 to 2022
$48.6M
AHRQ HHS R01 HS029009AHRQ HHS R21 HS028485NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002489
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Common data models provide a standard means of describing data for artificial intelligence (AI) applications, but this process has never been undertaken for medications used in the intensive care unit (ICU). We sought to develop a common data model (CDM) for ICU medications to standardize the medication features needed to support future ICU AI efforts. Materials and Methods: A 9-member, multi-professional team of ICU clinicians and AI experts conducted a 5-round modified Delphi process employing conference calls, web-based communication, and electronic surveys to define the most important medication features for AI efforts. Candidate ICU medication features were generated through group discussion and then independently scored by each team member based on relevance to ICU clinical decision-making and feasibility for collection and coding. A key consideration was to ensure the final ontology both distinguished unique medications and met Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR) guiding principles. Results: Using a list of 889 ICU medications, the team initially generated 106 different medication features, and 71 were ranked as being core features for the CDM. Through this process, 106 medication features were assigned to 2 key feature domains: drug product-related (n = 43) and clinical practice-related (n = 63). Each feature included a standardized definition and suggested response values housed in the electronic data library. This CDM for ICU medications is available online. Conclusion: The CDM for ICU medications represents an important first step for the research community focused on exploring how AI can improve patient outcomes and will require ongoing engagement and refinement.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencecommon data modelcritical care

Identifiers

PMID38699649
PMCPMC11064096

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.