ArticleJAMIA open2026
Comparing the effectiveness of a medication knowledge base product as designed with real-world hospital implementations using the Leapfrog Group's Computerized Physician Order Entry (CPOE/EHR) Evaluation Tool.
Article in JAMIA open, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: We sought to compare and analyze the performance of a medication knowledge base (MKB) vendor's (Medi-Span) fully enabled, factory settings product to operational implementations in hospitals using the Leapfrog Group's Computerized Physician Order Entry (CPOE)/electronic health record (EHR) Evaluation Tool. Materials and Methods: We randomly selected a hospital that used the MKB vendor's product to complete the Leapfrog CPOE/EHR Evaluation Tool in 2018 and used this version of the tool to assess the MKB vendor's fully enabled product. Next, we retrospectively evaluated all hospitals, regardless of EHR vendor, that used the MKB vendor's product in the tool from 2017 to 2019. We fit a multivariate linear regression model with hospitals' overall scores as the dependent variable and EHR vendor as the independent variable. Results: The fully enabled version of the MKB vendor achieved a 94% overall score in the tool. The mean overall score across 358 hospitals from 2017 to 2019 ranged from 61.1% to 68.8%. Finally, the regression model revealed EHR Vendor B hospitals scored 3.6 percentage points lower ( Discussion: The study revealed variations in the effectiveness of implementation and configuration of the MKB vendor's product across all EHR vendors at the hospital level. Conclusion: Our regression model found that EHR vendor had minimal effect on the overall tool scores. Therefore, EHR vendor is not nearly as important in the performance on the CPOE/EHR Evaluation Tool as the choices made in configuring the MKB vendor's product within a specific EHR.
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.