Health Care Equity in the Use of Advanced Analytics and Artificial Intelligence Technologies in Primary Care.

The integration of advanced analytics and artificial intelligence (AI) technologies into the practice of medicine holds much promise. Yet, the opportunity to leverage these tools carries with it an equal responsibility to ensure that principles of equity are incorporated into their implementation and use. Without such efforts, tools will potentially reflect the myriad of ways in which data, algorithmic, and analytic biases can be produced, with the potential to widen inequities by race, ethnicity, gender, and other sociodemographic factors implicated in disparate health outcomes. We propose a set of strategic assertions to examine before, during, and after adoption of these technologies in order to facilitate healthcare equity across all patient population groups. The purpose is to enable generalists to promote engagement with technology companies and co-create, promote, or support innovation and insights that can potentially inform decision-making and health care equity.

SPI-Hub™: a gateway to scholarly publishing information.

BACKGROUND: Advances in the health sciences rely on sharing research and data through publication. As information professionals are often asked to contribute their knowledge to assist clinicians and researchers in selecting journals for publication, the authors recognized an opportunity to build a decision support tool, SPI-Hub: Scholarly Publishing Information Hub™, to capture the team's collective publishing industry knowledge, while carefully retaining the quality of service. CASE PRESENTATION: SPI-Hub's decision support functionality relies on a data framework that describes journal publication policies and practices through a newly designed metadata structure, the Knowledge Management Journal Record™. Metadata fields are populated through a semi-automated process that uses custom programming to access content from multiple sources. Each record includes 25 metadata fields representing best publishing practices. Currently, the database includes more than 24,000 health sciences journal records. To correctly capture the resources needed for both completion and future maintenance of the project, the team conducted an internal study to assess time requirements for completing records through different stages of automation. CONCLUSIONS: The journal decision support tool, SPI-Hub, provides an opportunity to assess publication practices by compiling data from a variety of sources in a single location. Automated and semi-automated approaches have effectively reduced the time needed for data collection. Through a comprehensive knowledge management framework and the incorporation of multiple quality points specific to each journal, SPI-Hub provides prospective users with both recommendations for publication and holistic assessment of the trustworthiness of journals in which to publish research and acquire trusted knowledge.

Why equating all evidence searches to systematic reviews defies their role in information seeking.

All too often the quality and rigor of topic investigations is inaccurately conveyed to information professionals, resulting in a mischaracterization of the research, which, if left unchecked and published, may in turn mislead potential readers. Accurately understanding and categorizing the types of topic investigation searches that are requested of information professionals is critical to both meeting requestors' needs and reflecting their intended methodological approaches. Information professionals' expertise can be an invaluable resource to guide users through the investigative and publication process.

Instruments Assessing Cognitive Impairment in Survivors of Critical Illness and Reporting of Race Norms: A Systematic Review.

To conduct a systematic review to summarize cognitive instruments being used in long-term outcome studies of survivors of adult critical illness, as well as evaluate whether these measures are reported as using patient demographic norms, specifically race norms. DATA SOURCES: A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed (National Center for Biotechnology Information), Excerpta Medica dataBASE (Ovid), Psychological Information Database (ProQuest), and Web of Science (Clarivate) for English language studies published since 2002. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were eligible if the population included adult ICU survivors assessed for postdischarge cognitive outcomes. DATA EXTRACTION: Two independent reviewers screened abstracts, examined full text, and extracted data from all eligible articles. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 98 articles (55 unique cohorts: 22 general ICU, 14 Acute respiratory distress syndrome/Acute respiratory failure/Sepsis, 19 COVID-19 and other subpopulations) were eligible for data extraction and synthesis. Among general ICU survivors, the majority of studies (n = 15, 68%) assessed cognition using multiple instruments, of which the most common was the Mini-Mental State Examination. Only nine of the 22 studies (41%) explicitly reported using patient demographic norms for scoring neuropsychological cognitive tests. Of the nine, all reported using age as a norming characteristic, education was reported in eight (89%), sex/gender was reported in five (55%), and race/ethnicity was reported in three (33%). Among Acute respiratory distress syndrome/Acute respiratory failure/Sepsis survivors, norming characteristics were reported in only four (28%) of the 14 studies, of which all reported using age and none reported using race/ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: Less than half of the studies measuring cognitive outcomes in ICU survivors reported the use of norming characteristics. There is substantial heterogeneity in how studies reported the use of cognitive instruments, and hence, the prevalence of the use of patient norms may be underestimated. These findings are important in the development of appropriate standards for use and reporting of neuropsychological tests among ICU survivors.

Using SPI-Hub™ to Promote the Key Role of Prepublishing in Healthcare.

With the need to quickly advance knowledge dissemination in rapid-paced fields, and more recently in response to the urgency of the COVID-19 pandemic, prepublishing has been brought to the forefront. SPI-Hub™, a publicly available journal selection decision support tool, is being strategically enhanced to address prospective authors' critical needs in navigating and selecting the most appropriate preprint or traditional publication venue.

A narrative review of the impact of the transition to ICD-10 and ICD-10-CM/PCS.

OBJECTIVES: The United States transitioned to the tenth version of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) system (ICD-10) for mortality coding in 1999 and to the International Classification of Diseases, Clinical Modification and Procedure Coding System (ICD-10-CM/PCS) on October 1, 2015. The purpose of this study was to conduct a narrative literature review to better understand the impact of the implementation of ICD-10/ICD-10-CM/PCS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched English-language articles in PubMed, Web of Science, and Business Source Complete and reviewed websites of relevant professional associations, government agencies, research groups, and ICD-10 news aggregators to identify literature on the impact of the ICD-10/ICD-10-CM/PCS transition. We used Google to search for additional gray literature and used handsearching of the references of the most on-target articles to help ensure comprehensiveness. RESULTS: Impact areas reported in the literature include: productivity and staffing, costs, reimbursement, coding accuracy, mapping between ICD versions, morbidity and mortality surveillance, and patient care. With the exception of morbidity and mortality surveillance, quantitative studies describing the actual impact of the ICD-10/ICD-10-CM/PCS implementation were limited and much of the literature was based on the ICD-10-CM/PCS transition rather than the earlier conversion to ICD-10 for mortality coding. DISCUSSION: This study revealed several gaps in the literature that limit the ability to draw reliable conclusions about the overall impact, positive or negative, of moving to ICD-10/ICD-10-CM/PCS in the United States. CONCLUSION: These knowledge gaps present an opportunity for future research and knowledge sharing and will be important to consider when planning for ICD-11.

Using Best Practices to Extract, Organize, and Reuse Embedded Decision Support Content Knowledge Rules from Mature Clinical Systems.

Clinical decision support (CDS) knowledge, embedded over time in mature medical systems, presents an interesting and complex opportunity for information organization, maintenance, and reuse. To have a holistic view of all decision support requires an in-depth understanding of each clinical system as well as expert knowledge of the latest evidence. This approach to clinical decision support presents an opportunity to unify and externalize the knowledge within rules-based decision support. Driven by an institutional need to prioritize decision support content for migration to new clinical systems, the Center for Knowledge Management and Health Information Technology teams applied their unique expertise to extract content from individual systems, organize it through a single extensible schema, and present it for discovery and reuse through a newly created Clinical Support Knowledge Acquisition and Archival Tool (CS-KAAT). CS-KAAT can build and maintain the underlying knowledge infrastructure needed by clinical systems.