SynthesisBMC medical informatics and decision making2014
Use of handheld computers in clinical practice: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 3 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
30 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A systematic review on the effectiveness and impact of clinical decision support systems for breathlessness.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Decision-support tools via mobile devices to improve quality of care in primary healthcare settings.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Impact of Information and Communication Technologies on Nursing Care: Results of an Overview of Systematic Reviews.Journal of medical Internet research · 2017Pooled it
- A Rapid Response Mobile Application Improves First-Year Resident Clinical Performance During Simulated Care Events: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of general internal medicine · 2025Trial
- Handheld Computer Devices to Support Clinical Decision-making in Acute Nursing Practice: Systematic Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Skin tear prevalence in an Australian acute care hospital: A 10-year analysis.International wound journal · 2022Article
- Digital Education for Health Professionals: An Evidence Map, Conceptual Framework, and Research Agenda.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Review
- Challenges of Using Instant Communication Technology in the Emergency Department during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Focus Group Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Clinical decision support system RHINA in the diagnosis and treatment of acute or chronic rhinosinusitis.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2021Article
- Teaching scripts via smartphone app facilitate resident-led teaching of medical students.BMC medical education · 2021Article
- A Mobile App to Support Clinical Diagnosis of Upper Respiratory Problems (eHealthResp): Co-Design Approach.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- Article
- A Conceptual Framework to Study the Implementation of Clinical Decision Support Systems (BEAR): Literature Review and Concept Mapping.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Review
- Effectiveness of Digital Technologies to Support Nursing Care: Results of a Scoping Review.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2020Article
- Development and Usage ofJCO clinical cancer informatics · 2019Article
- Using the behavior change wheel to identify barriers to and potential solutions for primary care clinical guideline use in four provinces in South Africa.BMC health services research · 2018Article
- Going Mobile: Resident Physicians' Assessment of the Impact of Tablet Computers on Clinical Tasks, Job Satisfaction, and Quality of Care.Applied clinical informatics · 2018Article
- Developing an aftercare decision aid; assessing health professionals' and patients' preferences.European journal of cancer care · 2018Article
- The impact of home care nurses' numeracy and graph literacy on comprehension of visual display information: implications for dashboard design.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2018Article
- Patient's Experience in Pediatric Primary Immunodeficiency Disorders: Computerized Classification of Questionnaires.Frontiers in immunology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMany healthcare professionals use smartphones and tablets to inform patient care. Contemporary research suggests that handheld computers may support aspects of clinical diagnosis and management. This systematic review was designed to synthesise high quality evidence to answer the question; Does healthcare professionals' use of handheld computers improve their access to information and support clinical decision making at the point of care?
methodsA detailed search was conducted using Cochrane, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Science and Social Science Citation Indices since 2001. Interventions promoting healthcare professionals seeking information or making clinical decisions using handheld computers were included. Classroom learning and the use of laptop computers were excluded. Two authors independently selected studies, assessed quality using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and extracted data. High levels of data heterogeneity negated statistical synthesis. Instead, evidence for effectiveness was summarised narratively, according to each study's aim for assessing the impact of handheld computer use.
resultsWe included seven randomised trials investigating medical or nursing staffs' use of Personal Digital Assistants. Effectiveness was demonstrated across three distinct functions that emerged from the data: accessing information for clinical knowledge, adherence to guidelines and diagnostic decision making. When healthcare professionals used handheld computers to access clinical information, their knowledge improved significantly more than peers who used paper resources. When clinical guideline recommendations were presented on handheld computers, clinicians made significantly safer prescribing decisions and adhered more closely to recommendations than peers using paper resources. Finally, healthcare professionals made significantly more appropriate diagnostic decisions using clinical decision making tools on handheld computers compared to colleagues who did not have access to these tools. For these clinical decisions, the numbers need to test/screen were all less than 11.
conclusionHealthcare professionals' use of handheld computers may improve their information seeking, adherence to guidelines and clinical decision making. Handheld computers can provide real time access to and analysis of clinical information. The integration of clinical decision support systems within handheld computers offers clinicians the highest level of synthesised evidence at the point of care. Future research is needed to replicate these early results and to identify beneficial clinical outcomes.
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.