Cited by 101Electronic Health Records SystemsArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationKnowledge Management and Technology

The state of the art in clinical knowledge management: an inventory of tools and techniques

Open access
Sittig, Dean F., Wright, Adam, Simonaitis, Linas, Carpenter, James D., Allen, George O., Doebbeling, Bradley N., Sirajuddin, Anwar Mohammad, Ash, Joan S. +1 more·2010·International Journal of Medical Informatics

Abstract

Purpose To explore the need for, and use of, high-quality, collaborative, clinical knowledge management (CKM) tools and techniques to manage clinical decision support (CDS) content.Methods In order to better understand the current state of the art in CKM, we developed a survey of potential CKM tools and techniques. We conducted an exploratory study by querying a convenience sample of respondents about their use of specific practices in CKM.Results The following tools and techniques should be priorities in organizations interested in developing successful computer-based provider order entry (CPOE) and CDS implementations: (1) a multidisciplinary team responsible for creating and maintaining the clinical content; (2) an external organizational repository of clinical content with web-based viewer that allows anyone in the organization to review it; (3) an online, collaborative, interactive, Internet-based tool to facilitate content development; (4) an enterprise-wide tool to maintain the controlled clinical terminology concepts. Even organizations that have been successfully using computer-based provider order entry with advanced clinical decision support features for well over 15 years are not using all of the CKM tools or practices that we identified.Conclusions If we are to further stimulate progress in the area of clinical decision support, we must continue to develop and refine our understanding and use of advanced CKM capabilities.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2009.09.003

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A key challenge with clinical decision support is knowledge management as guidelines and best practices change over time, as well as governance.

    “A key challenge with clinical decision support is knowledge management as guidelines and best practices change over time,40–42 as well as governance.43–45”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. [25]Sittig DF Wright A Osheroff JA Middleton B Teich JM Ash JS Campbell E Bates DW Grand challenges in clinical decision support J Biomed Inform Apr 2008 41 2 387 92 18029232 PMC2660274
  2. [30]Alavi M Leidner DE Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues MIS Quarterly 2001 25 1 107 136
  3. [33]Chin HL Overhage JM The comprehensive computer-based patient record in Kaiser Permanente Northwest Proc Fourth Ann Davies Award 1998 69 129 McGraw-Hill New York
  4. [41]Shah NR Seger AC Seger DL Fiskio JM Kuperman GJ Blumenfeld B Recklet EG Bates DW Gandhi TK Improving acceptance of computerized prescribing alerts in ambulatory care J Am Med Inform Assoc Jan-Feb 2006 13 1 5 11 16221941 PMC1380196
  5. [44]Wright A Sittig DF A framework and model for evaluating clinical decision support architectures J Biomed Inform Dec 2008 41 6 982 90 18462999 PMC2638589
  6. [49]Osheroff JA Improving Medication Use and Outcomes with Clinical Decision Support A Step-by-Step Guide 2009 Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society PMC3316472 19894486
  7. [52]Shiffman RN Guideline maintenance and revision. 50 years of the Jones criteria for diagnosis of rheumatic fever Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med Jul 1995 149 7 727 32 7795761
  8. [53]Sittig DF Wright A Osheroff JA Middleton B Teich JM Ash JS Campbell E Bates DW Grand challenges in clinical decision support J Biomed Inform Apr 2008 41 2 387 92 18029232 PMC2660274
  9. [55]Dolin RH Mattison JE Cohn S Kaiser Permanente’s Convergent Medical Terminology Medinfo 2004 11 Pt 1 346 50 15360832

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sittig, D. F., Wright, A., Simonaitis, L., Carpenter, J. D., Allen, G. O., Doebbeling, B. N., Sirajuddin, A. M., Ash, J. S., & Middleton, B.
Affiliations
  • Memorial Hermann (US)
  • Regenstrief Institute (US)
  • Health Services Research & Development (US)
  • Oregon Health & Science University (US)
Corresponding author
Sittig, Dean F.
Venue
International Journal of Medical Informatics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-01
Volume
79
Issue
1
Pages
44-57
ISSN
1386-5056 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1982907589
Cited by
101
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 14
FWCI
21.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Medical Informatics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • IUScholarWorks (Indiana University) (submittedVersion)
  • Purdue University Indianapolis (Indiana University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
  • U.S. National Library of Medicine (R01LM006942, R56LM006942)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Knowledge Management and Technology
Keywords
clinical knowledge management, clinical decision support, collaborative content development
MeSH terms
Hospital Information Systems, Humans, Terminology as Topic, Patient Care Team, Software, United States, User-Computer Interface, Information Storage and Retrieval, Medical Records Systems, Computerized, Vocabulary, Controlled, Health Care Surveys, Decision Support Systems, Clinical, Internet, Interdisciplinary Communication

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review