ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2011
A clinical decision support needs assessment of community-based physicians.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Optimizing Clinical Decision Support System Functionality by Leveraging Specific Human-Computer Interaction Elements: Insights From a Systematic Review.JMIR human factors · 2025Pooled it
- Exploring the role of professional identity in the implementation of clinical decision support systems-a narrative review.Implementation science : IS · 2024Pooled it
- Comprehensive process model of clinical information interaction in primary care: results of a "best-fit" framework synthesis.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2018Pooled it
- Towards public health decision support: a systematic review of bidirectional communication approaches.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2013Pooled it
- Design and Evaluation of ACAFiB-APP, a clinical decision support system for anticoagulant considerations in patients with atrial fibrillation.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2025Article
- Data Challenges in Identifying Patients Due for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Rural Clinics.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM · 2023Article
- Immunization calculation engine: An open source immunization evaluation and forecasting system.Learning health systems · 2022Article
- Impacts of Operational Failures on Primary Care Physicians' Work: A Critical Interpretive Synthesis of the Literature.Annals of family medicine · 2020Review
- Variation in Physicians' Electronic Health Record Documentation and Potential Patient Harm from That Variation.Journal of general internal medicine · 2019Article
- Translating clinical trial results into personalized recommendations by considering multiple outcomes and subjective views.NPJ digital medicine · 2019Article
- Clinical Decision Support for Immunizations (CDSi): A Comprehensive, Collaborative Strategy.Biomedical informatics insights · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo conduct a grounded needs assessment to elicit community-based physicians' current views on clinical decision support (CDS) and its desired capabilities that may assist future CDS design and development for community-based practices. MATERIALS AND
methodsTo gain insight into community-based physicians' goals, environments, tasks, and desired support tools, we used a human-computer interaction model that was based in grounded theory. We conducted 30 recorded interviews with, and 25 observations of, primary care providers within 15 urban and rural community-based clinics across Oregon. Participants were members of three healthcare organizations with different commercial electronic health record systems. We used a grounded theory approach to analyze data and develop a user-centered definition of CDS and themes related to desired CDS functionalities.
resultsPhysicians viewed CDS as a set of software tools that provide alerts, prompts, and reference tools, but not tools to support patient management, clinical operations, or workflow, which they would like. They want CDS to enhance physician-patient relationships, redirect work among staff, and provide time-saving tools. Participants were generally dissatisfied with current CDS capabilities and overall electronic health record usability. DISCUSSION: Physicians identified different aspects of decision-making in need of support: clinical decision-making such as medication administration and treatment, and cognitive decision-making that enhances relationships and interactions with patients and staff.
conclusionPhysicians expressed a need for decision support that extended beyond their own current definitions. To meet this requirement, decision support tools must integrate functions that align time and resources in ways that assist providers in a broad range of decisions.
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.