The DOI matches its Crossref record; 100 of the 102 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The anatomy of decision support during inpatient care provider order entry (CPOE): Empirical observations from a decade of CPOE experience at Vanderbilt
Open accessAbstract
The authors describe a pragmatic approach to the introduction of clinical decision support at the point of care, based on a decade of experience in developing and evolving Vanderbilt's inpatient "WizOrder" care provider order entry (CPOE) system. The inpatient care setting provides a unique opportunity to interject CPOE-based decision support features that restructure clinical workflows, deliver focused relevant educational materials, and influence how care is delivered to patients. From their empirical observations, the authors have developed a generic model for decision support within inpatient CPOE systems. They believe that the model's utility extends beyond Vanderbilt, because it is based on characteristics of end-user workflows and on decision support considerations that are common to a variety of inpatient settings and CPOE systems. The specific approach to implementing a given clinical decision support feature within a CPOE system should involve evaluation along three axes: what type of intervention to create (for which the authors describe 4 general categories); when to introduce the intervention into the user's workflow (for which the authors present 7 categories), and how disruptive, during use of the system, the intervention might be to end-users' workflows (for which the authors describe 6 categories). Framing decision support in this manner may help both developers and clinical end-users plan future alterations to their systems when needs for new decision support features arise.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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?
In the citing paper
“Studies undertaken in a secondary care setting have suggested the importance of presenting alerts at the point of selecting drugs (as opposed to the moment of printing), 22”
From ‘Too much, too late’: mixed methods multi-channel video recording study of computerized decision support systems and GP prescribing (2013) · cites this paper as [22]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Ash, J. S. (2003) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m1471 · Cited by 1,789
The Timing of Prophylactic Administration of Antibiotics and the Risk of Surgical-Wound Infection
Classen, D. C., Evans, R. S., Pestotnik, S. L., Horn, S. D., Menlove, R. L., & Burke, J. P. (1992) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199201303260501 · Cited by 1,734
Bates, D. W., Kuperman, G. J., Wang, S., Gandhi, T., Kittler, A., Volk, L., Spurr, C., Khorasani, R., Tanasijevic, M., & Middleton, B. (2003) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m1370 · Cited by 1,346
A Computer-Assisted Management Program for Antibiotics and Other Antiinfective Agents
Evans, R. S., Pestotnik, S. L., Classen, D. C., Clemmer, T. P., Weaver, L. K., Orme, J. F., Lloyd, J. F., & Burke, J. P. (1998) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199801223380406 · Cited by 1,060
Reducing the Frequency of Errors in Medicine Using Information Technology
Bates, D. W., Cohen, M., Leape, L. L., Overhage, J. M., Shabot, M. M., & Sheridan, T. (2001) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1136/jamia.2001.0080299 · Cited by 959
Information Needs in Office Practice: Are They Being Met?
Covell, D. G., UMAN, G. C., & MANNING, P. R. (1985) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-103-4-596 · Cited by 852
Protocol-Based Computer Reminders, the Quality of Care and the Non-Perfectability of Man
McDonald, C. J. (1976) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm197612092952405 · Cited by 797
A COMPUTER-ASSISTED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR ANTIBIOTICS AND OTHER ANTIINFECTIVE AGENTS
Vans, R. S. C. E., Estotnik, S. T. L. P., Lassen, D. A. C. C., Lemmer, T., Eaver, L. I. K. W., Rme, J. A. F. O., Loyd, J. A. F. L., & Urke, J. O. P. B. (1998) · Cited by 692
Physician Inpatient Order Writing on Microcomputer Workstations
Tierney, W. M. (1993) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.269.3.379 · Cited by 549
Using information technology to reduce rates of medication errors in hospitals
Bates, D. W. (2000) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.320.7237.788 · Cited by 487
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Development of a Large-Scale De-Identified DNA Biobank to Enable Personalized Medicine
Roden, D. M., Pulley, J. M., Basford, M., Bernard, G. R., Clayton, E. W., Balser, J., & Masys, D. R. (2008) · Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics · doi:10.1038/clpt.2008.89 · Cited by 966
Medication-related clinical decision support in computerized provider order entry systems: a review
Kuperman, G. J., Bobb, A., Payne, T. H., Avery, A. J., Gandhi, T. K., Burns, G., Classen, D. C., & Bates, D. W. (2007) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m2170 · Cited by 763
Grand challenges in clinical decision support
Sittig, D. F., Wright, A., Osheroff, J. A., Middleton, B., Teich, J. M., Ash, J. S., Campbell, E., & Bates, D. W. (2008) · Journal of Biomedical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2007.09.003 · Cited by 582
Nuckols, T. K., Smith-Spangler, C., Morton, S. C., Asch, S. M., Patel, V. M., Anderson, L. J., Deichsel, E. L., & Shekelle, P. G. (2014) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/2046-4053-3-56 · Cited by 340
Computerized clinical decision support for prescribing: provision does not guarantee uptake
Moxey, A., Robertson, J., Newby, D., Hains, I., Williamson, M., & Pearson, S.-A. (2010) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m3170 · Cited by 305
Metadata
- Authors
- Miller, R. A., Waitman, L. R., Chen, S., & Rosenbloom, S. T.
- Affiliations
- Vanderbilt University Medical Center (US)
- Corresponding author
- Miller, Randolph A.
- Venue
- Journal of Biomedical Informatics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2005-12
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 469-485
- ISSN
- 1532-0464 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2098595796
- Cited by
- 144
- References
- 102
- Citations by year
- 2024: 5 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 11
- FWCI
- 18.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Biomedical Informatics (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Vanderbilt University
- National Institutes of Health (5r01lm007995-06, 5r01lm006226-03)
- School of Medicine, Vanderbilt University
- U.S. National Library of Medicine (K22-LM-08576, R01-LM-007995, K22LM008576, LM06226, R01-LM-06226)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Technology and Human Factors in Education and Health
- Keywords
- clinical decision support, computerized physician order entry, inpatient care, point-of-care intervention, clinical workflow, workflow disruption, clinical teaching
- MeSH terms
- Admitting Department, Hospital, Decision Making, Organizational, Humans, Inpatients, Patient Education as Topic, Personnel, Hospital, Professional-Patient Relations, Tennessee
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
