首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA >Measuring the Impact of Diagnostic Decision Support on the Quality of Clinical Decision Making: Development of a Reliable and Valid Composite Score
【2h】

Measuring the Impact of Diagnostic Decision Support on the Quality of Clinical Decision Making: Development of a Reliable and Valid Composite Score

机译:衡量诊断决策支持对临床决策质量的影响:建立可靠有效的综合评分

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

>Objective: Few previous studies evaluating the benefits of diagnostic decision support systems have simultaneously measured changes in diagnostic quality and clinical management prompted by use of the system. This report describes a reliable and valid scoring technique to measure the quality of clinical decision plans in an acute medical setting, where diagnostic decision support tools might prove most useful.>Design: Sets of differential diagnoses and clinical management plans generated by 71 clinicians for six simulated cases, before and after decision support from a Web-based pediatric differential diagnostic tool (ISABEL), were used.>Measurements: A composite quality score was calculated separately for each diagnostic and management plan by considering the appropriateness value of each component diagnostic or management suggestion, a weighted sum of individual suggestion ratings, relevance of the entire plan, and its comprehensiveness. The reliability and validity (face, concurrent, construct, and content) of these two final scores were examined.>Results: Two hundred fifty-two diagnostic and 350 management suggestions were included in the interrater reliability analysis. There was good agreement between raters (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.79 for diagnoses, and 0.72 for management). No counterintuitive scores were demonstrated on visual inspection of the sets. Content validity was verified by a consultation process with pediatricians. Both scores discriminated adequately between the plans of consultants and medical students and correlated well with clinicians' subjective opinions of overall plan quality (Spearman ρ 0.65, p < 0.01). The diagnostic and management scores for each episode showed moderate correlation (r = 0.51).>Conclusion: The scores described can be used as key outcome measures in a larger study to fully assess the value of diagnostic decision aids, such as the ISABEL system.
机译:>目标:以往很少有评估诊断决策支持系统的好处的研究同时测量了由于使用该系统而引起的诊断质量和临床管理方面的变化。本报告介绍了一种可靠且有效的评分技术,可用于衡量急性医疗环境中的临床决策计划的质量,在这种情况下,诊断决策支持工具可能被证明是最有用的。>设计:一组差异诊断和临床管理计划在使用基于Web的儿科鉴别诊断工具(ISABEL)的决策支持之前和之后,使用了71位临床医生针对6个模拟病例生成的结果。>测量:为每个诊断和评估分别计算综合质量得分通过考虑每个组成部分诊断或管理建议的适当性值,单个建议评级的加权总和,整个计划的相关性及其全面性来制定管理计划。对这两个最终得分的信度和效度(面子,并发,构造和内容)进行了检验。>结果:跨界可靠性分析中包括252条诊断和350条管理建议。评分者之间具有良好的一致性(类内相关系数,诊断为0.79,管理为0.72)。在集合的视觉检查中没有发现违反直觉的得分。通过与儿科医生的协商过程验证了内容的有效性。这两个分数在顾问计划和医学生计划之间进行了充分区分,并且与临床医生对总体计划质量的主观意见相关性很高(Spearmanρ0.65,p <0.01)。每个发作的诊断和管理得分均显示出中等相关性(r = 0.51)。>结论:所描述的得分可以用作大型研究中的关键成果指标,以全面评估诊断决策辅助工具的价值,例如ISABEL系统。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号