Adam Wright1, Howard Goldberg, Tonya Hongsermeier, Blackford Middleton. 1. Department of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, Oregon Health & Science University, 3181 Sam Jackson Park Road, Portland, OR 97239, USA. wrightad@ohsu.edu; bmiddleton1@partners.org
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study sought to develop a functional taxonomy of rule-based clinical decision support. DESIGN: The rule-based clinical decision support content of a large integrated delivery network with a long history of computer-based point-of-care decision support was reviewed and analyzed along four functional dimensions: trigger, input data elements, interventions, and offered choices. RESULTS: A total of 181 rule types were reviewed, comprising 7,120 different instances of rule usage. A total of 42 taxa were identified across the four categories. Many rules fell into multiple taxa in a given category. Entered order and stored laboratory result were the most common triggers; laboratory result, drug list, and hospital unit were the most frequent data elements used. Notify and log were the most common interventions, and write order, defer warning, and override rule were the most common offered choices. CONCLUSION: A relatively small number of taxa successfully described a large body of clinical knowledge. These taxa can be directly mapped to functions of clinical systems and decision support systems, providing feature guidance for developers, implementers, and certifiers of clinical information systems.
OBJECTIVE: This study sought to develop a functional taxonomy of rule-based clinical decision support. DESIGN: The rule-based clinical decision support content of a large integrated delivery network with a long history of computer-based point-of-care decision support was reviewed and analyzed along four functional dimensions: trigger, input data elements, interventions, and offered choices. RESULTS: A total of 181 rule types were reviewed, comprising 7,120 different instances of rule usage. A total of 42 taxa were identified across the four categories. Many rules fell into multiple taxa in a given category. Entered order and stored laboratory result were the most common triggers; laboratory result, drug list, and hospital unit were the most frequent data elements used. Notify and log were the most common interventions, and write order, defer warning, and override rule were the most common offered choices. CONCLUSION: A relatively small number of taxa successfully described a large body of clinical knowledge. These taxa can be directly mapped to functions of clinical systems and decision support systems, providing feature guidance for developers, implementers, and certifiers of clinical information systems.
Authors: Elizabeth A McGlynn; Steven M Asch; John Adams; Joan Keesey; Jennifer Hicks; Alison DeCristofaro; Eve A Kerr Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-06-26 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Anatoly Postilnik; Matvey B Palchuk; Michael Vashevko; Boris Rudelson; Nina Plaks; Jeffrey L Schnipper; Jeffrey A Linder; Qi Li; Blackford Middleton Journal: AMIA Annu Symp Proc Date: 2006
Authors: G M Chertow; J Lee; G J Kuperman; E Burdick; J Horsky; D L Seger; R Lee; A Mekala; J Song; A L Komaroff; D W Bates Journal: JAMA Date: 2001-12-12 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Samuel J Wang; Blackford Middleton; Lisa A Prosser; Christiana G Bardon; Cynthia D Spurr; Patricia J Carchidi; Anne F Kittler; Robert C Goldszer; David G Fairchild; Andrew J Sussman; Gilad J Kuperman; David W Bates Journal: Am J Med Date: 2003-04-01 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: Saverio M Maviglia; Rita D Zielstorff; Marilyn Paterno; Jonathan M Teich; David W Bates; Gilad J Kuperman Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2003 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Howard S Goldberg; Marilyn D Paterno; Beatriz H Rocha; Molly Schaeffer; Adam Wright; Jessica L Erickson; Blackford Middleton Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2013-07-04 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: José Luis Fernández-Alemán; Carlos Luis Seva-Llor; Ambrosio Toval; Sofia Ouhbi; Luis Fernández-Luque Journal: J Med Syst Date: 2013-11-13 Impact factor: 4.460
Authors: Adam Wright; Dean F Sittig; Joan S Ash; Sapna Sharma; Justine E Pang; Blackford Middleton Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2009-06-30 Impact factor: 4.497