Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011 May 1;18(3):232-42.
doi: 10.1136/amiajnl-2011-000113. Epub 2011 Mar 17.

Development and evaluation of a comprehensive clinical decision support taxonomy: comparison of front-end tools in commercial and internally developed electronic health record systems

Adam Wright  1 , Dean F Sittig, Joan S Ash, Joshua Feblowitz, Seth Meltzer, Carmit McMullen, Ken Guappone, Jim Carpenter, Joshua Richardson, Linas Simonaitis, R Scott Evans, W Paul Nichol, Blackford Middleton
Affiliations

Development and evaluation of a comprehensive clinical decision support taxonomy: comparison of front-end tools in commercial and internally developed electronic health record systems

Adam Wright et al. J Am Med Inform Assoc. .

Abstract

Background: Clinical decision support (CDS) is a valuable tool for improving healthcare quality and lowering costs. However, there is no comprehensive taxonomy of types of CDS and there has been limited research on the availability of various CDS tools across current electronic health record (EHR) systems.

Objective: To develop and validate a taxonomy of front-end CDS tools and to assess support for these tools in major commercial and internally developed EHRs.

Study design and methods: We used a modified Delphi approach with a panel of 11 decision support experts to develop a taxonomy of 53 front-end CDS tools. Based on this taxonomy, a survey on CDS tools was sent to a purposive sample of commercial EHR vendors (n=9) and leading healthcare institutions with internally developed state-of-the-art EHRs (n=4).

Results: Responses were received from all healthcare institutions and 7 of 9 EHR vendors (response rate: 85%). All 53 types of CDS tools identified in the taxonomy were found in at least one surveyed EHR system, but only 8 functions were present in all EHRs. Medication dosing support and order facilitators were the most commonly available classes of decision support, while expert systems (eg, diagnostic decision support, ventilator management suggestions) were the least common.

Conclusion: We developed and validated a comprehensive taxonomy of front-end CDS tools. A subsequent survey of commercial EHR vendors and leading healthcare institutions revealed a small core set of common CDS tools, but identified significant variability in the remainder of clinical decision support content.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Garg AX, Adhikari NK, McDonald H, et al. Effects of computerized clinical decision support systems on practitioner performance and patient outcomes: a systematic review. JAMA 2005;293:1223–38 - PubMed
    1. Kawamoto K, Houlihan CA, Balas EA, et al. Improving clinical practice using clinical decision support systems: a systematic review of trials to identify features critical to success. BMJ 2005;330:765. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Saleem JJ, Patterson ES, Militello L, et al. Exploring barriers and facilitators to the use of computerized clinical reminders. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2005;12:438–47 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Paterno MD, Maviglia SM, Gorman PN, et al. Tiering drug-drug interaction alerts by severity increases compliance rates. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2009;16:40–6 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Roberts GW, Farmer CJ, Cheney PC, et al. Clinical decision support implemented with academic detailing improves prescribing of key renally cleared drugs in the hospital setting. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2010;17:308–12 - PMC - PubMed

Publication types