FluAlert: A qualitative evaluation of providers' desired characteristics and concerns regarding computerized influenza vaccination alerts
Abstract
Objective To explore pediatric providers' perceived barriers to influenza vaccine delivery, and desired characteristics and potential concerns regarding an influenza vaccine alert integrated into the electronic health record (EHR). Methods Four focus groups with providers (n=21) and five individual interviews with practice leaders in an urban, pediatric primary care network affiliated with an academic medical center in New York City were conducted. Data were collected during the 2009-10 influenza season and analyzed using thematic analysis. Results Participants identified several barriers to influenza vaccine delivery, including remembering to vaccinate during sick visits, need to review multiple sources of immunization information, time shortages and inadequate staffing. They felt that an alert could help many of these challenges. They desired the following alert characteristics: 1) alerting providers early in the visit, 2) accurately determining patients' vaccine status by merging multiple sources of immunization information, 3) facilitating vaccine ordering, and 4) generating appropriate documentation in the EHR when vaccines were refused or otherwise not given. Potential concerns regarding the alert included reliability and accuracy of alert, workflow interruptions and forced actions. Conclusions This study highlights providers' interest in a well-integrated, accurate alert that streamlines assessment of vaccination eligibility, ordering and documentation without impeding…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Methods for evaluating CDS impact on EHR activities remain limited, and existing approaches are hard to scale up for large implementation programs.
“Methods for evaluating CDS impact on EHR activities remain limited, and existing approaches (eg, direct observation, qualitative interview, and survey) are hard to scale up for large implementation programs.”
From Electronic health record activity changes around new decision support implementation: monitoring using audit logs and topic modeling (2025) · cites this paper as [68]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Olakotan, O. O., & Mohd Yusof, M. (2021) · Health Informatics Journal · doi:10.1177/14604582211007536 · Cited by 101 · see citing works
Barriers to the use of reminder/recall interventions for immunizations: a systematic review
the Public Health Agency of Canada/Canadian Institutes of Health Research Influenza Research Network (PCIRN) Vaccine Coverage Theme Group, Pereira, J. A., Quach, S., Heidebrecht, C. L., Quan, S. D., Kolbe, F., Finkelstein, M., & Kwong, J. C. (2012) · BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making · doi:10.1186/1472-6947-12-145 · Cited by 50 · see citing works
Chen, J., Cutrona, S. L., Dharod, A., Moses, A., Bridges, A., Ostasiewski, B., Foley, K. L., Houston, T. K., iDAPT (Implementation & Informatics Developing Adaptable Processes and Technologies for Cancer Control) Implementation Science Center for Cancer Control, Chen, J., et al. (2025) · JAMIA Open · doi:10.1093/jamiaopen/ooaf050 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
- Authors
- Birmingham, E., Catallozzi, M., Findley, S. E., Vawdrey, D. K., Kukafka, R., & Stockwell, M. S.
- Affiliations
- Columbia University Irving Medical Center (US)
- NewYork–Presbyterian Hospital (US)
- Columbia University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Stockwell, Melissa S.
- Venue
- Preventive Medicine
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2011-03
- Volume
- 52
- Issue
- 3-4
- Pages
- 274-277
- ISSN
- 0091-7435 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2068334292
- Cited by
- 23
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 3.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Preventive Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
- Social Sciences › Health › Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Medical Coding and Health Information
- Keywords
- influenza vaccination, automated alerts, electronic health records, pediatric primary care, provider perceptions, immunization information systems, clinical workflow
- MeSH terms
- Attitude of Health Personnel, Humans, Influenza Vaccines, Interviews as Topic, Medical Record Linkage, New York City, Pediatrics, Time Factors, Reminder Systems, Focus Groups, Efficiency, Organizational, Qualitative Research, Electronic Health Records
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