These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
228 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17460130)
1. A systematic review of the performance characteristics of clinical event monitor signals used to detect adverse drug events in the hospital setting. Handler SM; Altman RL; Perera S; Hanlon JT; Studenski SA; Bost JE; Saul MI; Fridsma DB J Am Med Inform Assoc; 2007; 14(4):451-8. PubMed ID: 17460130 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Assessing the performance characteristics of signals used by a clinical event monitor to detect adverse drug reactions in the nursing home. Handler SM; Hanlon JT; Perera S; Saul MI; Fridsma DB; Visweswaran S; Studenski SA; Roumani YF; Castle NG; Nace DA; Becich MJ AMIA Annu Symp Proc; 2008 Nov; 2008():278-82. PubMed ID: 18998853 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Performance of the adverse drug event trigger tool and the global trigger tool for identifying adverse drug events: experience in a Belgian hospital. Carnevali L; Krug B; Amant F; Van Pee D; Gérard V; de Béthune X; Spinewine A Ann Pharmacother; 2013 Nov; 47(11):1414-9. PubMed ID: 24285758 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Adverse drug event detection in pediatric oncology and hematology patients: using medication triggers to identify patient harm in a specialized pediatric patient population. Call RJ; Burlison JD; Robertson JJ; Scott JR; Baker DK; Rossi MG; Howard SC; Hoffman JM J Pediatr; 2014 Sep; 165(3):447-52.e4. PubMed ID: 24768254 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Computerized surveillance of adverse drug events in hospital patients. Classen DC; Pestotnik SL; Evans RS; Burke JP JAMA; 1991 Nov; 266(20):2847-51. PubMed ID: 1942452 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Evaluation of a computer-based adverse-drug-event monitor. Hwang SH; Lee S; Koo HK; Kim Y Am J Health Syst Pharm; 2008 Dec; 65(23):2265-72. PubMed ID: 19020194 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A computerized adverse drug event alerting system using clinical rules: a retrospective and prospective comparison with conventional medication surveillance in the Netherlands. Rommers MK; Teepe-Twiss IM; Guchelaar HJ Drug Saf; 2011 Mar; 34(3):233-42. PubMed ID: 21332247 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Can surveillance systems identify and avert adverse drug events? A prospective evaluation of a commercial application. Jha AK; Laguette J; Seger A; Bates DW J Am Med Inform Assoc; 2008; 15(5):647-53. PubMed ID: 18579834 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Development of a Computer-Assisted Adverse Drug Events Alarm and Assessment System for Hospital Inpatients in China. Chen C; Jia W; Guo D; Zhu M; Xu Y; Wang X; Wang D; Wang W; Tang Z Ther Innov Regul Sci; 2020 Jan; 54(1):32-41. PubMed ID: 32008241 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Automated surveillance for adverse drug events at a community hospital and an academic medical center. Kilbridge PM; Campbell UC; Cozart HB; Mojarrad MG J Am Med Inform Assoc; 2006; 13(4):372-7. PubMed ID: 16622159 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comparing the effectiveness of computerized adverse drug event monitoring systems to enhance clinical decision support for hospitalized patients. Petratos GN; Kim Y; Evans RS; Williams SD; Gardner RM Appl Clin Inform; 2010; 1(3):293-303. PubMed ID: 23616843 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas. Crider K; Williams J; Qi YP; Gutman J; Yeung L; Mai C; Finkelstain J; Mehta S; Pons-Duran C; Menéndez C; Moraleda C; Rogers L; Daniels K; Green P Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2022 Feb; 2(2022):. PubMed ID: 36321557 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Evaluation of rule effectiveness and positive predictive value of clinical rules in a Dutch clinical decision support system in daily hospital pharmacy practice. Rommers MK; Zwaveling J; Guchelaar HJ; Teepe-Twiss IM Artif Intell Med; 2013 Sep; 59(1):15-21. PubMed ID: 23664455 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Development of a computerized adverse drug event monitor. Evans RS; Pestotnik SL; Classen DC; Bass SB; Menlove RL; Gardner RM; Burke JP Proc Annu Symp Comput Appl Med Care; 1991; ():23-7. PubMed ID: 1807594 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Predictive value of alert triggers for identification of developing adverse drug events. Moore C; Li J; Hung CC; Downs J; Nebeker JR J Patient Saf; 2009 Dec; 5(4):223-8. PubMed ID: 22130215 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Trigger tools to identify adverse drug events in hospitalised children: A systematic review. Arab R; Cornu C; Kilo R; Portefaix A; Fretes-Bonett B; Hergibo F; Kassai B; Nguyen KA Therapie; 2022; 77(5):527-539. PubMed ID: 35190187 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Impact of health information technology on detection of potential adverse drug events at the ordering stage. Roberts LL; Ward MM; Brokel JM; Wakefield DS; Crandall DK; Conlon P Am J Health Syst Pharm; 2010 Nov; 67(21):1838-46. PubMed ID: 20966148 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Methods for assessing the preventability of adverse drug events: a systematic review. Hakkarainen KM; Andersson Sundell K; Petzold M; Hägg S Drug Saf; 2012 Feb; 35(2):105-26. PubMed ID: 22201475 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Adverse drug event rates in six community hospitals and the potential impact of computerized physician order entry for prevention. Hug BL; Witkowski DJ; Sox CM; Keohane CA; Seger DL; Yoon C; Matheny ME; Bates DW J Gen Intern Med; 2010 Jan; 25(1):31-8. PubMed ID: 19894081 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]