ArticleBritish journal of cancer2006
Evidence-based guidelines and decision support services: A discussion and evaluation in triple assessment of suspected breast cancer.
Article in British journal of cancer, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05355727 (PROSAIC-DS), which is not on this map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
PROSAIC-DS (PROState AI in Cancer - Decision Support): Evaluation of the Deontics AI Platform for Evidence-based Treatment Planning in Multidisciplinary Cancer Care: Increasing Compliance and Streamlining MDTs in Prostate Cancer
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 58 citations in OpenAlex.
- What maximizes the effectiveness and implementation of technology-based interventions to support healthcare professional practice? A systematic literature review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2018Pooled it
- Trial
- Care-pathway decision support improves non-specialist vet clinical decision making in dogs with myelopathy.Journal of veterinary internal medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Computer-interpretable guidelines: electronic tools to enhance the utility of thyroid nodule clinical practice guidelines and risk stratification tools.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
- OpenClinical.net: Artificial intelligence and knowledge engineering at the point of care.BMJ health & care informatics · 2020Review
- Trends in descriptions of palliative care in the cancer clinical practice guidelines before and after enactment of the Cancer Control Act (2007): content analysis.BMC palliative care · 2019Article
- Guideline-based Clinical Decision Support Systems as an Inseparable Tool for Better Cancer Care Management.Iranian journal of public health · 2016Article
- Implementation of an electronic surgical referral service. Collaboration, consensus and cost of the surgeon - general practitioner Delphi approach.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2014Article
- A scalable architecture for incremental specification and maintenance of procedural and declarative clinical decision-support knowledge.The open medical informatics journal · 2010Article
- From practice guidelines to clinical decision support: closing the loop.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2009Article
- Supporting multidisciplinary staff meetings for guideline-based breast cancer management: a study with OncoDoc2.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2007Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Widespread health service goals to improve consistency and safety in patient care have prompted considerable investment in the development of evidence-based clinical guidelines. Computerised decision support (CDS) systems have been proposed as a means to implement guidelines in practice. This paper discusses the general concept in oncology and presents an evaluation of a CDS system to support triple assessment (TA) in breast cancer care. Balanced-block crossover experiment and questionnaire study. One stop clinic for symptomatic breast patients. Twenty-four practising breast clinicians from United Kingdom National Health Service hospitals. A web-based CDS system. Clinicians made significantly more deviations from guideline recommendations without decision support (60 out of 120 errors without CDS; 16 out of 120 errors with CDS, P < 0.001). Ignoring minor deviations, 16 potentially critical errors arose in the no-decision-support arm of the trial compared with just one (P = 0.001) when decision support was available. Opinions of participating clinicians towards the CDS tool became more positive after they had used it (P < 0.025). The use of decision support capabilities in TA may yield significant measurable benefits for quality and safety of patient care. This is an important option for improving compliance with evidence-based practice guidelines.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.