SynthesisThe patient2015
Computer-Based Clinical Decision Support Systems and Patient-Reported Outcomes: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in The patient, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Design, effectiveness, and economic outcomes of contemporary chronic disease clinical decision support systems: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022Pooled it
- The effect of computerized decision support systems on cardiovascular risk factors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2019Pooled it
- A Systematic Review of Clinical Decision Support Systems for Clinical Oncology Practice.Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN · 2019Pooled it
- Conducting a representative national randomized control trial of tailored clinical decision support for nurses remotely: Methods and implications.Contemporary clinical trials · 2022Trial
- Computerized patient-reported symptom assessment in radiotherapy: a pilot randomized, controlled trial.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2016Trial
- Evaluation of point-of-care PRO assessment in clinic settings: integration, parallel-forms reliability, and patient acceptability of electronic QOL measures during clinic visits.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2016Trial
- Evaluating Methodological Coherence and Evidence Recognition in Digital Health Systematic Reviews: Sample-based Meta-research Study.Online journal of public health informatics · 2026Review
- PICO-based assessment and categorization of evidence for digital health interventions: an inductive framework development.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Review
- Application of eHealth Tools in Anticoagulation Management After Cardiac Valve Replacement: Scoping Review Coupled With Bibliometric Analysis.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2024Article
- Effects of Hospital Digitization on Clinical Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction: Nationwide Multiple Regression Analysis Across German Hospitals.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- Evaluation Framework for Successful Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Clinical Decision Support Systems: Mixed Methods Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- Electronic health records and clinician burnout: A story of three eras.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021Article
- An in-hospital clinical care pathway with integrated decision support for cancer pain management reduced pain intensity and needs for hospital stay.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2020Article
- Effectiveness of Digital Technologies to Support Nursing Care: Results of a Scoping Review.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2020Article
- Merits, features, and desiderata to be considered when developing electronic health records with embedded clinical decision support systems in Palestinian hospitals: a consensus study.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2019Article
- Digital technology and nursing care: a scoping review on acceptance, effectiveness and efficiency studies of informal and formal care technologies.BMC health services research · 2019Article
- Usability testing of EirV3-a computer-based tool for patient-reported outcome measures in cancer.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2019Article
- Models Used in Clinical Decision Support Systems Supporting Healthcare Professionals Treating Chronic Wounds: Systematic Literature Review.JMIR diabetes · 2018Review
- Associations Between Pediatric Palliative Care Consultation and End-of-Life Preparation at an Academic Medical Center: A Retrospective EHR Analysis.Hospital pediatrics · 2018Article
- Advances in Clinical Decision Support: Highlights of Practice and the Literature 2015-2016.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEvidence-based treatment guidelines embedded in computer-based clinical decision support systems (CCDSS) may improve patient-reported outcomes (PRO). We systematically reviewed the literature for content and application of CCDSS, and their effects on PRO.
methodsA systematic review in MEDLINE and EMBASE was conducted according to PRISMA standards. Searches were limited to the publication period 1996-May 2014 and the English language. The search terms covered "computerized clinical decision systems" and "patient-reported outcomes". Screening and extraction was done independently by two reviewers according to predefined inclusion (computer and guideline) and exclusion criteria (no trial, no PRO). Study and CCDSS quality was rated according to predefined criteria.
resultsThe database searches identified 1,331 references. Eighty-seven full-text articles were analyzed. The main reason for exclusion was no PRO as a study outcome measure. Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria, representing 13,480 patients. Nine studies used a computerized device to fill in data; in four studies, this was used by the patients themselves. Most of the studies presented the data to the clinician at point of care and incorporated international guidelines. Three studies showed a positive effect on PRO, but only on symptoms. Overall, no negative effects were reported. There was no association with study quality or year of study publication.
conclusionThere are marginal positive effects of CCDSS on specific PRO. Factors that facilitate the use and effect are identified. Easy to use systems with difficult to ignore evidence-based advice need to be developed and tested.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25432150What 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.