Navigating Alert Fatigue: A Case Study in Electronic Health Record Alert Design Optimization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clinical decision support (CDS) systems play a crucial role in enhancing patient outcomes, but inadequate design contributes to alert fatigue, inundating clinicians with disruptive alerts that lack clinical relevance. This case study delves into a quality improvement (QI) project addressing nursing electronic health record (EHR) alert fatigue by strategically redesigning four high-firing/low action alerts. Employing a mixed-methods approach, including quantitative analysis, empathy mapping sessions, and user feedback, the project sought to understand and alleviate the challenges posed by these alerts. Virtual empathy mapping sessions with clinical nurses provided valuable insights into user experiences. Qualitative findings, CDS design principles, and organizational practice expectations informed the redesign process, resulting in the removal of all four identified disruptive alerts and redesign of passive alerts. This initiative released 877 unactionable disruptive nursing hours, emphasizing the significance of proper alert design and the necessity for organizational structures ensuring sustained governance in healthcare system optimization.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".