Special Issue on CDS Failures: A two-phase framework leveraging user feedback and systemic validation to improve post-live Clinical Decision Support.

IF 2.2 2区 医学 Q4 MEDICAL INFORMATICS
Wendi Zhao, Xuetao Wang, Kevin Afra
{"title":"Special Issue on CDS Failures: A two-phase framework leveraging user feedback and systemic validation to improve post-live Clinical Decision Support.","authors":"Wendi Zhao, Xuetao Wang, Kevin Afra","doi":"10.1055/a-2644-7250","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Despite the benefits of Clinical Decision Support (CDS), concerns of potential risks arise amidst increasing reports of CDS malfunctions. Without objective and standard methods to evaluate CDS in post-live stage, CDS performance in dynamic healthcare environment remains a black box from user perspective. In this study, we proposed a comprehensive framework to identify and evaluate post-live CDS malfunctions from the perspective of healthcare settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We developed a 2-phase framework to identify and evaluate post-live CDS system malfunctions: (1) Real-time feedback from users in healthcare settings (2) Systematic validation through the use of databases that involves fundamental data flow validation and knowledge and rules validation. Identity, completeness, plausibility, consistency across locations and time patterns were included as measures for systematic validation. We applied this framework on a commercial CDS system in 14 acute care facilities in Canada in a 2-year period.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During this study, 7 types of malfunctions were identified. The general rate of malfunctions was below 2%. In addition, an increase in CDS malfunctions was found during electronic health record (EHR) upgrade and implementation periods.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This framework can be used to comprehensively evaluate CDS performance for healthcare settings. It provides objective insights into the extent of CDS issues, with the ability to capture low prevalence malfunctions. Applying this framework to CDS evaluation can help improve CDS performance from the perspective of healthcare settings. KEY WORDS Clinical decision support, Methodologies, Error management and prevention, Quality.</p>","PeriodicalId":48956,"journal":{"name":"Applied Clinical Informatics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Clinical Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2644-7250","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Despite the benefits of Clinical Decision Support (CDS), concerns of potential risks arise amidst increasing reports of CDS malfunctions. Without objective and standard methods to evaluate CDS in post-live stage, CDS performance in dynamic healthcare environment remains a black box from user perspective. In this study, we proposed a comprehensive framework to identify and evaluate post-live CDS malfunctions from the perspective of healthcare settings.

Methods: We developed a 2-phase framework to identify and evaluate post-live CDS system malfunctions: (1) Real-time feedback from users in healthcare settings (2) Systematic validation through the use of databases that involves fundamental data flow validation and knowledge and rules validation. Identity, completeness, plausibility, consistency across locations and time patterns were included as measures for systematic validation. We applied this framework on a commercial CDS system in 14 acute care facilities in Canada in a 2-year period.

Results: During this study, 7 types of malfunctions were identified. The general rate of malfunctions was below 2%. In addition, an increase in CDS malfunctions was found during electronic health record (EHR) upgrade and implementation periods.

Conclusions: This framework can be used to comprehensively evaluate CDS performance for healthcare settings. It provides objective insights into the extent of CDS issues, with the ability to capture low prevalence malfunctions. Applying this framework to CDS evaluation can help improve CDS performance from the perspective of healthcare settings. KEY WORDS Clinical decision support, Methodologies, Error management and prevention, Quality.

关于CDS失败的特刊:一个利用用户反馈和系统验证的两阶段框架,以改善术后临床决策支持。
目的:尽管临床决策支持(CDS)的好处,但随着越来越多的CDS故障报告,潜在风险的担忧也出现了。从用户的角度来看,如果没有客观和标准的方法来评估CDS的后期阶段,动态医疗保健环境中的CDS性能仍然是一个黑盒子。在这项研究中,我们提出了一个全面的框架,从医疗保健设置的角度来识别和评估活后CDS故障。方法:我们开发了一个两阶段的框架来识别和评估实时CDS系统故障:(1)医疗环境中用户的实时反馈;(2)通过使用数据库进行系统验证,包括基本数据流验证、知识和规则验证。身份、完整性、合理性、跨地点和时间模式的一致性被包括作为系统验证的措施。我们将此框架应用于加拿大14家急症护理机构的商业CDS系统,历时2年。结果:在本研究中,确定了7种类型的故障。总体故障率低于2%。此外,在电子健康记录(EHR)升级和实施期间,发现CDS故障增加。结论:该框架可用于全面评估医疗机构的CDS性能。它提供了对CDS问题程度的客观见解,并能够捕获低患病率的故障。从医疗保健设置的角度来看,将此框架应用于CDS评估可以帮助提高CDS性能。【关键词】临床决策支持;方法学;错误管理与预防;
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Applied Clinical Informatics
Applied Clinical Informatics MEDICAL INFORMATICS-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
24.10%
发文量
132
期刊介绍: ACI is the third Schattauer journal dealing with biomedical and health informatics. It perfectly complements our other journals Öffnet internen Link im aktuellen FensterMethods of Information in Medicine and the Öffnet internen Link im aktuellen FensterYearbook of Medical Informatics. The Yearbook of Medical Informatics being the “Milestone” or state-of-the-art journal and Methods of Information in Medicine being the “Science and Research” journal of IMIA, ACI intends to be the “Practical” journal of IMIA.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信