ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2025
A standard-based taxonomy of features that affect user response to clinical decision support alerts.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2025. 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
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this work is to develop a standard-based taxonomy of features that might affect user response to alerts using evidence from literature and public alert logic repositories.
methodsWe developed a taxonomy of features using multiple sources: (1) the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) CDS Connect Repository, (2) alert logic from commercial electronic health record (EHR) customers, and (3) published literature. Three categories (patient, provider, environment/context) were used a priori to develop the taxonomy. The final taxonomy was mapped to the Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) standard for development of standardized CDS services.
resultsAggregating potential features extracted from three data sources, we identified 95 unique features, which we then mapped to the FHIR standard, encompassing 24 FHIR resources. The common features differed depending on the knowledge source. In the AHRQ public alert repository, frequently occurring features were observations in flowsheets, procedures, diagnoses, medications, and patient age. On the other hand, the commercial EHR customers primarily presented features such as diagnosis type, patient age, diagnosis grouper, diagnosis, medication value set. Literature-based insights revealed that provider type, medication, patient age, alert severity, and medication dose were the most common features.
conclusionThis study demonstrated a standard-based taxonomy of features that could impact user responses to CDS alerts, bridging insights from academic studies and industry practices. The taxonomy stands as a foundational tool, guiding the CDS development, implementation, and evaluation, with the overarching goal of improving user acceptance and healthcare quality.
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.