Physicians view and respond to a small proportion of alerts, mainly for higher-risk patients.
The estimation of individualised alert thresholds was feasible, and a proportion of alerts occurred during the three days preceding 'events', when patients decided to initiate their standby medicines to treat an exacerbation.
In addition, the need to incorporate more comprehensive feedback on the quality and outcomes of drug prescribing for physicians that generate a high proportion of alerts should be evaluated in subsequent research.
In most, if not all, systems a large proportion of alerts generated by CDS is overridden (i.e. clinician chooses to proceed without adjusting or cancelling the prescription) [ 10, 15, 18, 19].
In the study by Bhardwaja et al. [ 16], false-positive alerts determined as the proportion of alerts that had a creatinine clearance level > 51 ml/min on medical record review, reduced from 32%to0.5%5% one year after the alert was changed to drug-specific creatinine clearance cut-off.
Therefore, assessments of EWS performance should report the proportions of alerts missed and erroneously generated.
Assessments of EWS performance should, therefore, report the proportions of alerts missed and erroneously generated, along with a measure of the error rate in recognising when a patient first becomes unstable.
We see over time (1990 to 2013) that there was an increase in the proportion of 'UwE' alerts to other alerts, suggesting increasing willingness to use VALs well before an eruption is certain.
Pie chart (B) shows the proportion of 'UwE' alerts as a percentage Categories 2-6, i.e. of total alerts less Category 1 ('Missed'Missed
Unlike DDI alerts in e-prescribing, there is no way to determine what proportion of fax alerts were received and reviewed by prescribers.
