scholarly journals Contributions on Clinical Decision Support from the 2018 Literature

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (01) ◽  
pp. 135-137 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vassilis Koutkias ◽  
Jacques Bouaud ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Metastatic Cancer ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Data Driven ◽  
Editorial Team ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Bibliographic Databases ◽  
Free Text

Objectives: To summarize recent research and select the best papers published in 2018 in the field of computerized clinical decision support for the Decision Support section of the International Medical Informatics Association (IMIA) yearbook. Methods: A literature review was performed by searching two bibliographic databases for papers referring to clinical decision support systems (CDSSs). The aim was to identify a list of candidate best papers from the retrieved bibliographic records, which were then peer-reviewed by external reviewers. A consensus meeting of the IMIA editorial team finally selected the best papers on the basis of all reviews and the section editors' evaluation. Results: Among 1,148 retrieved articles, 15 best paper candidates were selected, the review of which resulted in the selection of four best papers. The first paper introduces a deep learning model for estimating short-term life expectancy (>3 months) of metastatic cancer patients by analyzing free-text clinical notes in electronic medical records, while maintaining the temporal visit sequence. The second paper takes note that CDSSs become routinely integrated in health information systems and compares statistical anomaly detection models to identify CDSS malfunctions which, if remain unnoticed, may have a negative impact on care delivery. The third paper fairly reports on lessons learnt from the development of an oncology CDSS using artificial intelligence techniques and from its assessment in a large US cancer center. The fourth paper implements a preference learning methodology for detecting inconsistencies in clinical practice guidelines and illustrates the applicability of the proposed methodology to antibiotherapy. Conclusions: Three of the four best papers rely on data-driven methods, and one builds on a knowledge-based approach. While there is currently a trend for data-driven decision support, the promising results of such approaches still need to be confirmed by the adoption of these systems and their routine use.

scholarly journals Computerized Clinical Decision Support: Contributions from 2014

2015 ◽  
Vol 24 (01) ◽  
pp. 119-124 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Koutkias ◽  
J. Bouaud ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Information Technologies ◽  
Clinical Decision Support Systems ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Editorial Team ◽  
Bibliographic Databases ◽  
Health Information Technologies ◽  
Selection Of

Summary Objective: To summarize recent research and propose a selection of best papers published in 2014 in the field of computerized clinical decision support for the Decision Support section of the IMIA yearbook.Method: A literature review was performed by searching two bibliographic databases for papers related to clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) and computerized provider order entry systems in order to select a list of candidate best papers to be then peer-reviewed by external reviewers. A consensus meeting between the two section editors and the editorial team was finally organized to conclude on the selection of best papers. Results: Among the 1,254 returned papers published in 2014, the full review process selected four best papers. The first one is an experimental contribution to a better understanding of unintended uses of CDSSs. The second paper describes the effective use of previously collected data to tailor and adapt a CDSS. The third paper presents an innovative application that uses pharmacogenomic information to support personalized medicine. The fourth paper reports on the long-term effect of the routine use of a CDSS for antibiotic therapy. Conclusions: As health information technologies spread more and more meaningfully, CDSSs are improving to answer users’ needs more accurately. The exploitation of previously collected data and the use of genomic data for decision support has started to materialize. However, more work is still needed to address issues related to the correct usage of such technologies, and to assess their effective impact in the long term.

scholarly journals Best Paper Selection

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (01) ◽  
pp. 138-139
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Decision Support ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Metastatic Cancer ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Preference Learning ◽  
Free Text ◽  
Statistical Anomaly Detection

Banerjee I, Gensheimer MF, Wood DJ, Henry S, Aggarwal S, Chang DT, Rubin DL. Probabilistic prognostic estimates of survival in metastatic cancer patients (PPES-Met) utilizing free-text clinical narratives. Sci Rep 2018 Jul 3;8(1):10037 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6030075/ Ray S, McEvoy DS, Aaron S, Hickman TT, Wright A. Using statistical anomaly detection models to find clinical decision support malfunctions. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2018 Jul 1;25(7):862-71 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6016695/ Simon G, DiNardo CD, Takahashi K, Cascone T, Powers C, Stevens R, Allen J, Antonoff MB, Gomez D, Keane P, Suarez Saiz F, Nguyen Q, Roarty E, Pierce S, Zhang J, Hardeman Barnhill E, Lakhani K, Shaw K, Smith B, Swisher S, High R, Futreal PA, Heymach, Chin L. Applying Artificial Intelligence to address the knowledge gaps in cancer care. Oncologist 2018 Nov 16 pii: theoncologist.2018-0257 http://theoncologist.alphamedpress.org/content/24/6/772.long Tsopra R, Lamy JB, Sedki K. Using preference learning for detecting inconsistencies in clinical practice guidelines: methods and application to antibiotherapy. Artif Intell Med 2018 Jul;89:24-33 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0933365718300873?via%3Dihub

scholarly journals Computerized Clinical Decision Support: Contributions from 2015

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (01) ◽  
pp. 170-177 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Bouaud ◽  
V. Koutkias ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Decision Support ◽  
Decision Support Systems ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Support Systems ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Editorial Team ◽  
Bibliographic Databases ◽  
Evaluation Tool ◽  
Theoretical Frameworks

Summary Objective: To summarize recent research and select the best papers published in 2015 in the field of computerized clinical decision support for the Decision Support section of the IMIA yearbook. Method: A literature review was performed by searching two bibliographic databases for papers related to clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) and computerized provider order entry (CPOE) systems. The aim was to identify a list of candidate best papers from the retrieved papers that were then peer-reviewed by external reviewers. A consensus meeting between the two section editors and the IMIA editorial team was finally conducted to conclude in the best paper selection. Results: Among the 974 retrieved papers, the entire review process resulted in the selection of four best papers. One paper reports on a CDSS routinely applied in pediatrics for more than 10 years, relying on adaptations of the Arden Syntax. Another paper assessed the acceptability and feasibility of an important CPOE evaluation tool in hospitals outside the US where it was developed. The third paper is a systematic, qualitative review, concerning usability flaws of medication-related alerting functions, providing an important evidence-based, methodological contribution in the domain of CDSS design and development in general. Lastly, the fourth paper describes a study quantifying the effect of a complex, continuous-care, guideline-based CDSS on the correctness and completeness of clinicians’ decisions. Conclusions: While there are notable examples of routinely used decision support systems, this 2015 review on CDSSs and CPOE systems still shows that, despite methodological contributions, theoretical frameworks, and prototype developments, these technologies are not yet widely spread (at least with their full functionalities) in routine clinical practice. Further research, testing, evaluation, and training are still needed for these tools to be adopted in clinical practice and, ultimately, illustrate the benefits that they promise.

scholarly journals Contributions from the 2016 Literature on Clinical Decision Support

2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (01) ◽  
pp. 133-137
Author(s):  
V. Koutkias ◽  
J. Bouaud
Keyword(s):  
Machine Learning ◽  
Decision Support ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Healthcare Delivery ◽  
Clinical Decision Support Systems ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Editorial Team ◽  
Bibliographic Databases ◽  
Semantic Web Technologies ◽  
The Us

Summary Objectives: To summarize recent research and select the best papers published in 2016 in the field of computerized clinical decision support for the Decision Support section of the IMIA yearbook. Methods: A literature review was performed by searching two bibliographic databases for papers related to clinical decision support systems (CDSSs). The aim was to identify a list of candidate best papers from the retrieved papers that were then peer-reviewed by external reviewers. A consensus meeting of the IMIA editorial team finally selected the best papers on the basis of all reviews and section editor evaluation. Results: Among the 1,145 retrieved papers, the entire review process resulted in the selection of four best papers. The first paper describes machine learning models used to predict breast cancer multidisciplinary team decisions and compares them with two predictors based on guideline knowledge. The second paper introduces a linked-data approach for publication, discovery, and interoperability of CDSSs. The third paper assessed the variation in high-priority drug-drug interaction (DDI) alerts across 14 Electronic Health Record systems, operating in different institutions in the US. The fourth paper proposes a generic framework for modeling multiple concurrent guidelines and detecting their recommendation interactions using semantic web technologies. Conclusions: The process of identifying and selecting best papers in the domain of CDSSs demonstrated that the research in this field is very active concerning diverse dimensions, such as the types of CDSSs, e.g. guideline-based, machine-learning-based, knowledge-fusion-based, etc., and addresses challenging areas, such as the concurrent application of multiple guidelines for comorbid patients, the resolution of interoperability issues, and the evaluation of CDSSs. Nevertheless, this process also showed that CDSSs are not yet fully part of the digitalized healthcare ecosystem. Many challenges remain to be faced with regard to the evidence of their output, the dissemination of their technologies, as well as their adoption for better and safer healthcare delivery.

scholarly journals Contributions from the 2017 Literature on Clinical Decision Support

2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (01) ◽  
pp. 122-128 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Koutkias ◽  
J. Bouaud ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Knowledge Bases ◽  
Data Driven ◽  
Editorial Team ◽  
Reference List ◽  
Surgical Team ◽  
The Impact

Objectives: To summarize recent research and select the best papers published in 2017 in the field of computerized clinical decision support for the Decision Support section of the International Medical Informatics Association (IMIA) yearbook. Methods: A literature review was performed by searching two bibliographic databases for papers referring to clinical decision support systems (CDSSs). The aim was to identify a list of candidate best papers from the retrieved bibliographic records, which were then peer-reviewed by external reviewers. A consensus meeting of the IMIA editorial team finally selected the best papers on the basis of all reviews and the section editors' evaluation. Results: Among the 1,194 retrieved papers, the entire review process resulted in the selection of four best papers. The first paper studies the impact of recency and of longitudinal extent of electronic health record (EHR) datasets used to train a data-driven predictive model of inpatient admission orders. The second paper presents a decision support tool for surgical team selection, relying on the history of surgical team members and the specific characteristics of the patient. The third paper compares three commercial drug-drug interaction knowledge bases, particularly against a reference list of highly-significant known interactions. The fourth paper focuses on supporting the diagnosis of postoperative delirium using an adaptation of the “anchor and learn” framework, which was applied in unstructured texts contained in EHRs. Conclusions: The conducted review illustrated also this year that research in the field of CDSS is very active. Of note is the increase in publications concerning data-driven CDSSs, as revealed by the review process and also reflected by the four papers that have been selected. This trend is in line with the current attention that “Big Data” and data-driven artificial intelligence have gained in the domain of health and CDSSs in particular.

scholarly journals Contributions from the 2016 Literature on Clinical Decision Support

2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (01) ◽  
pp. 133-138 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Koutkias ◽  
J. Bouaud
Keyword(s):  
Machine Learning ◽  
Decision Support ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Healthcare Delivery ◽  
Clinical Decision Support Systems ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Editorial Team ◽  
Bibliographic Databases ◽  
Semantic Web Technologies ◽  
The Us

Summary Objectives: To summarize recent research and select the best papers published in 2016 in the field of computerized clinical decision support for the Decision Support section of the IMIA yearbook. Methods: A literature review was performed by searching two bibliographic databases for papers related to clinical decision support systems (CDSSs). The aim was to identify a list of candidate best papers from the retrieved papers that were then peer-reviewed by external reviewers. A consensus meeting of the IMIA editorial team finally selected the best papers on the basis of all reviews and section editor evaluation. Results: Among the 1,145 retrieved papers, the entire review process resulted in the selection of four best papers. The first paper describes machine learning models used to predict breast cancer multidisciplinary team decisions and compares them with two predictors based on guideline knowledge. The second paper introduces a linked-data approach for publication, discovery, and interoperability of CDSSs. The third paper assessed the variation in high-priority drug-drug interaction (DDI) alerts across 14 Electronic Health Record systems, operating in different institutions in the US. The fourth paper proposes a generic framework for modeling multiple concurrent guidelines and detecting their recommendation interactions using semantic web technologies. Conclusions: The process of identifying and selecting best papers in the domain of CDSSs demonstrated that the research in this field is very active concerning diverse dimensions, such as the types of CDSSs, e.g. guideline-based, machine-learning-based, knowledge-fusion-based, etc., and addresses challenging areas, such as the concurrent application of multiple guidelines for comorbid patients, the resolution of interoperability issues, and the evaluation of CDSSs. Nevertheless, this process also showed that CDSSs are not yet fully part of the digitalized healthcare ecosystem. Many challenges remain to be faced with regard to the evidence of their output, the dissemination of their technologies, as well as their adoption for better and safer healthcare delivery.

Characterizing Workflow to Inform Clinical Decision Support Systems in Nursing Homes

2018 ◽  
Vol 59 (6) ◽  
pp. 1024-1033 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mustafa Ozkaynak ◽  
Blaine Reeder ◽  
Cynthia Drake ◽  
Peter Ferrarone ◽  
Barbara Trautner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Data Analysis ◽  
Nursing Homes ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Clinical Decision Support Systems ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Staff Members ◽  
Design And Implementation ◽  
Multiple Levels

Abstract Background and Objectives Clinical decision support systems (CDSS) hold promise to influence clinician behavior at the point of care in nursing homes (NHs) and improving care delivery. However, the success of these interventions depends on their fit with workflow. The purpose of this study was to characterize workflow in NHs and identify implications of workflow for the design and implementation of CDSS in NHs. Research Design and Methods We conducted a descriptive study at 2 NHs in a metropolitan area of the Mountain West Region of the United States. We characterized clinical workflow in NHs, conducting 18 observation sessions and interviewing 15 staff members. A multilevel work model guided our data collection and framework method guided data analysis. Results The qualitative analysis revealed specific aspects of multilevel workflow in NHs: (a) individual, (b) work group/unit, (c) organization, and (d) industry levels. Data analysis also revealed several additional themes regarding workflow in NHs: centrality of ongoing relationships of staff members with the residents to care delivery in NHs, resident-centeredness of care, absence of memory aids, and impact of staff members’ preferences on work activities. We also identified workflow-related differences between the two settings. Discussion and Implications Results of this study provide a rich understanding of the characteristics of workflow in NHs at multiple levels. The design of CDSS in NHs should be informed by factors at multiple levels as well as the emergent processes and contextual factors. This understanding can allow for incorporating workflow considerations into CDSS design and implementation.

scholarly journals Examining Workflow in a Pediatric Emergency Department to Develop a Clinical Decision Support for an Antimicrobial Stewardship Program

2018 ◽  
Vol 09 (02) ◽  
pp. 248-260 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mustafa Ozkaynak ◽  
Danny Wu ◽  
Katia Hannah ◽  
Peter Dayan ◽  
Rakesh Mistry
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Antimicrobial Stewardship ◽  
Time Allocation ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Design And Implementation ◽  
Decision Points ◽  
Stewardship Program

Background Clinical decision support (CDS) embedded into the electronic health record (EHR), is a potentially powerful tool for institution of antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) in emergency departments (EDs). However, design and implementation of CDS systems should be informed by the existing workflow to ensure its congruence with ED practice, which is characterized by erratic workflow, intermittent computer interactions, and variable timing of antibiotic prescription. Objective This article aims to characterize ED workflow for four provider types, to guide future design and implementation of an ED-based ASP using the EHR. Methods Workflow was systematically examined in a single, tertiary-care academic children's hospital ED. Clinicians with four roles (attending, nurse practitioner, physician assistant, resident) were observed over a 3-month period using a tablet computer-based data collection tool. Structural observations were recorded by investigators, and classified using a predetermined set of activities. Clinicians were queried regarding timing of diagnosis and disposition decision points. Results A total of 23 providers were observed for 90 hours. Sixty-four different activities were captured for a total of 6,060 times. Among these activities, nine were conducted at different frequency or time allocation across four roles. Moreover, we identified differences in sequential patterns across roles. Decision points, whereby clinicians then proceeded with treatment, were identified 127 times. The most common decision points identified were: (1) after/during examining or talking to patient or relative; (2) after talking to a specialist; and (3) after diagnostic test/image was resulted and discussed with patient/family. Conclusion The design and implementation of CDS for ASP should support clinicians in various provider roles, despite having different workflow patterns. The clinicians make their decisions about treatment at different points of overall care delivery practice; likewise, the CDS should also support decisions at different points of care.

scholarly journals Cranky comments: detecting clinical decision support malfunctions through free-text override reasons

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Skye Aaron ◽  
Dustin S McEvoy ◽  
Soumi Ray ◽  
Thu-Trang T Hickman ◽  
Adam Wright
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Naive Bayes ◽  
Word List ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Naïve Bayes ◽  
Free Text ◽  
Naive Bayes Classifier ◽  
Bayes Classifier ◽  
Naïve Bayes Classifier

Abstract Background Rule-base clinical decision support alerts are known to malfunction, but tools for discovering malfunctions are limited. Objective Investigate whether user override comments can be used to discover malfunctions. Methods We manually classified all rules in our database with at least 10 override comments into 3 categories based on a sample of override comments: “broken,” “not broken, but could be improved,” and “not broken.” We used 3 methods (frequency of comments, cranky word list heuristic, and a Naïve Bayes classifier trained on a sample of comments) to automatically rank rules based on features of their override comments. We evaluated each ranking using the manual classification as truth. Results Of the rules investigated, 62 were broken, 13 could be improved, and the remaining 45 were not broken. Frequency of comments performed worse than a random ranking, with precision at 20 of 8 and AUC = 0.487. The cranky comments heuristic performed better with precision at 20 of 16 and AUC = 0.723. The Naïve Bayes classifier had precision at 20 of 17 and AUC = 0.738. Discussion Override comments uncovered malfunctions in 26% of all rules active in our system. This is a lower bound on total malfunctions and much higher than expected. Even for low-resource organizations, reviewing comments identified by the cranky word list heuristic may be an effective and feasible way of finding broken alerts. Conclusion Override comments are a rich data source for finding alerts that are broken or could be improved. If possible, we recommend monitoring all override comments on a regular basis.

scholarly journals A Closer Look at the “Right” Format for Clinical Decision Support: Methods for Evaluating a Storyboard BestPractice Advisory

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 142
Author(s):  
Brian J. Douthit ◽  
R. Clayton Musser ◽  
Kay S. Lytle ◽  
Rachel L. Richesson
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Local Level ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
System Level ◽  
Evaluation Methodology ◽  
Task Completion ◽  
Free Text ◽  
Alert Fatigue ◽  
The Impact

(1) Background: The five rights of clinical decision support (CDS) are a well-known framework for planning the nuances of CDS, but recent advancements have given us more options to modify the format of the alert. One-size-fits-all assessments fail to capture the nuance of different BestPractice Advisory (BPA) formats. To demonstrate a tailored evaluation methodology, we assessed a BPA after implementation of Storyboard for changes in alert fatigue, behavior influence, and task completion; (2) Methods: Data from 19 weeks before and after implementation were used to evaluate differences in each domain. Individual clinics were evaluated for task completion and compared for changes pre- and post-redesign; (3) Results: The change in format was correlated with an increase in alert fatigue, a decrease in erroneous free text answers, and worsened task completion at a system level. At a local level, however, 14% of clinics had improved task completion; (4) Conclusions: While the change in BPA format was correlated with decreased performance, the changes may have been driven primarily by the COVID-19 pandemic. The framework and metrics proposed can be used in future studies to assess the impact of new CDS formats. Although the changes in this study seemed undesirable in aggregate, some positive changes were observed at the level of individual clinics. Personalized implementations of CDS tools based on local need should be considered.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document