SynthesisImplementation science : IS2011
Computerized clinical decision support systems for acute care management: a decision-maker-researcher partnership systematic review of effects on process of care and patient outcomes.
Synthesis in Implementation science : IS, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03012919 (Evaluation of an Active Decision Support System for Hemodynamic Optimization During High Risk Vascular Surgery), which is not on this map. Cited by 59 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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.
Evaluation of an Active Decision Support System for Hemodynamic Optimization During High Risk Vascular Surgery
Who cites it
59 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Computer-Based Clinical Decision Support Systems and Patient-Reported Outcomes: A Systematic Review.The patient · 2015Pooled it
- Reducing diagnostic errors in primary care. A systematic meta-review of computerized diagnostic decision support systems by the LINNEAUS collaboration on patient safety in primary care.The European journal of general practice · 2015Pooled it
- An Evaluation of the Effects of Human Factors and Ergonomics on Health Care and Patient Safety Practices: A Systematic Review.PloS one · 2015Pooled it
- Computer decision support systems for asthma: a systematic review.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2014Pooled it
- Electronic health record alerts for acute kidney injury: multicenter, randomized clinical trial.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2021Trial
- Evaluating the uptake and effects of the computerized decision support system NHGDoc on quality of primary care: protocol for a large-scale cluster randomized controlled trial.Implementation science : IS · 2014Trial
- Feasibility and impact of an evidence-based electronic decision support system for diabetes care in family medicine: protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial.Implementation science : IS · 2013Trial
- Artificial intelligence to support clinical practice across the inpatient heart failure care pathway: a systematic review.European heart journal. Digital health · 2026Review
- The use of machine learning to predict pharmacological therapy in gestational diabetes: A scoping review.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2026Review
- Mixed methods evaluation of a clinical decision support system to reduce variation in healthcare.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Evaluation of a Decision Support System Developed with Deep Learning Approach for Detecting Dental Caries with Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Imaging.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Clinical Informatics in Critical Care Medicine.The Yale journal of biology and medicine · 2023Review
- Effects of the Pregnancy and Newborn Diagnostic Assessment (PANDA) App on Antenatal Care Quality in Burkina Faso: Protocol for a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2023Article
- An Innovative Framework for Sustainable Development in Healthcare: The Human Rights Assessment.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Forecasting of Patient-Specific Kidney Transplant Function With a Sequence-to-Sequence Deep Learning Model.JAMA network open · 2021Article
- Evaluation of a Clinical Decision Support Strategy to Increase Seasonal Influenza Vaccination Among Hospitalized Children Before Inpatient Discharge.JAMA network open · 2021Article
- Intention to Use Wiki-Based Knowledge Tools: Survey of Quebec Emergency Health Professionals.JMIR medical informatics · 2021Article
- Evaluation Framework for Successful Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Clinical Decision Support Systems: Mixed Methods Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- Clinical decision support systems-based interventions to improve medication outcomes: A systematic literature review on features and effects.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2021Review
- Computerized clinical decision system and mobile application with expert support to optimize management of vertigo in primary care: study protocol for a pragmatic cluster-randomized controlled trial.Journal of neurology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAcute medical care often demands timely, accurate decisions in complex situations. Computerized clinical decision support systems (CCDSSs) have many features that could help. However, as for any medical intervention, claims that CCDSSs improve care processes and patient outcomes need to be rigorously assessed. The objective of this review was to systematically review the effects of CCDSSs on process of care and patient outcomes for acute medical care.
methodsWe conducted a decision-maker-researcher partnership systematic review. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews databases (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, DARE, ACP Journal Club, and others), and the Inspec bibliographic database were searched to January 2010, in all languages, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of CCDSSs in all clinical areas. We included RCTs that evaluated the effect on process of care or patient outcomes of a CCDSS used for acute medical care compared with care provided without a CCDSS. A study was considered to have a positive effect (i.e., CCDSS showed improvement) if at least 50% of the relevant study outcomes were statistically significantly positive.
resultsThirty-six studies met our inclusion criteria for acute medical care. The CCDSS improved process of care in 63% (22/35) of studies, including 64% (9/14) of medication dosing assistants, 82% (9/11) of management assistants using alerts/reminders, 38% (3/8) of management assistants using guidelines/algorithms, and 67% (2/3) of diagnostic assistants. Twenty studies evaluated patient outcomes, of which three (15%) reported improvements, all of which were medication dosing assistants.
conclusionThe majority of CCDSSs demonstrated improvements in process of care, but patient outcomes were less likely to be evaluated and far less likely to show positive results.
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.