Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2013 Jun 12.
Published in final edited form as: BMJ Qual Saf. 2011 Oct 13;21(2):93–100. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2011-000304

Table 2. Site Specific Positive Predictive Values (PPVs) and False Positive Proportions.

Total number of errors Total number selected for review PPV in current EHR system 95% Exact CIs False positive proportion¥ 95% Exact CIs Expected PPV in an ideal EHR system* 95% Exact CIs
n n % n % %

Site A T1 95 454 20.9% (17.3, 25.0) 74 16.3% (13.0, 20.0) 25.0% (20.7, 29.7)

Site A T2 23 432 5.3% (3.4, 7.9) 50 11.6% (8.7, 15.0) 6.0% (3.9, 8.9)

Site A Control 11 414 2.7% (1.3, 4.7) 7 1.7% (0.70, 3.4) 2.7% (1.4, 4.8)

Site B T1 46 220 20.9% (15.7, 26.9) 31 14.1% (9.8, 19.4) 24.3% (18.4, 31.1)

Site B T2 13 237 5.5% (3.0, 9.2) 14 5.9% (3.3, 9.7) 5.8% (3.1, 9.8)

Site B Control 2 200 1.0% (0.12, 3.6) 13 6.5% (3.5, 10.9) 1.1% (0.13, 3.8)

Overall 190 1957 189
*

Calculation: Numerator is the total number of errors and Denominator is the total number of selected for review minus the number of false positives

¥

Includes records where no documentation of clinical notes was found, patients left without being seen by the provider, patients saw a non-provider, or patients were advised admission for further work-up but refused

Abbreviations: EHR, electronic health record; T1, Trigger 1; T2, Trigger 2.