Clinical decision support tools for order entry
Medical Radiology, ISSN: 2197-4187, Page: 21-34
2018
- 1Citations
- 12Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Book Chapter Description
Medical imaging has helped to transform healthcare and will continue to advance the understanding and treatment of disease. Despite the substantial benefits of medical imaging, there is wide variation in the use of imaging (especially high-cost imaging) and concern about it’s inappropriate use persists. Inappropriate use may result in suboptimal quality of care and wasteand may harm patients by exposure to unnecessary ionizing radiation, the risks of over-diagnosis and over-treatment, including unnecessary additional tests and treatments provided in follow-up of incidental or ambiguous imaging findings. Clinical decision support tools for order entry provide an opportunity to embed evidence/ clinical best practices in the workflow of providers requesting imaging examinations to reduce inappropriate use of imaging. In this chapter, we define clinical decision support for order entry, review trends in imaging use and describe general features of effective clinical decision support including experience from large-scale implementations. We conclude by reviewing some of the emerging challenges and opportunities for imaging clinical decision support and future directions.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85053809845&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/174_2017_162; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/174_2017_162; http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/174_2017_162; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/174_2017_162; https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/174_2017_162
Springer Nature America, Inc
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know