ArticleJAMIA open2024
A dynamic customized electronic health record rule based clinical decision support tool for standardized adult intensive care metrics.
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 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.
- A Research Agenda to Mitigate Racial and Ethnic Disparities in U.S. Critical Care Medicine: An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 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
Objectives: Many routine patient care items should be reviewed at least daily for intensive care unit (ICU) patients. These items are often incompletely performed, and dynamic clinical decision support tools (CDSTs) may improve attention to these daily items. We sought to evaluate the accuracy of institutionalized electronic health record (EHR) based custom dynamic CDST to support 22 ICU rounding quality metrics across 7 categories (hypoglycemia, venothromboembolism prophylaxis, stress ulcer prophylaxis, mechanical ventilation, sedation, nutrition, and catheter removal). Design: The dynamic CDST evaluates patient characteristics and patient orders, then identifies gaps between active interventions and conditions with recommendations of evidence based clinical practice guidelines across 22 areas of care for each patient. The results of the tool prompt clinicians to address any identified care gaps. We completed a confusion matrix to assess the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of the dynamic CDST and the individual metrics. Setting: Tertiary academic medical center and community hospital ICUs. Subject: Customized Clinical Decision Support Tool. Measurements and Main Results: The metrics were evaluated 1421 times over 484 patients. The overall accuracy of the entire dynamic CDST is 0.979 with a sensitivity of 0.979, specificity of 0.978, PPV 0.969, and NPV 0.986. Conclusions: A customized, EHR based dynamic CDST can be highly accurate. Integrating a comprehensive dynamic CDST into existing workflows could improve attention and actions related to routine ICU quality metrics.
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.