ArticleJournal of health informatics
[International outcomes from attempts to implement a clinical decision support system in gastroenterology].
Article in Journal of health informatics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A Clinical Support System Based on Quality of Life Estimation.Journal of medical systems · 2015Article
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
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed at describing the recent experience acquired with the implementation and use of clinical decision support system in gastroenterology in order to determine the level of development, tests used and advantages that such a system can offer to the medical practice.
methodsA search in the PubMed, LILACS and ISI Web of Knowledge databases for studies in decision-making support systems in gastroenterology including original papers produced from 2005 to 2010 was performed. A total of 104 scientific papers were retrieved initially. These were analyzed using inclusion and exclusion criteria, thus yielding nine studies for further analysis.
resultsThe clinical decision support system analyzed in the present study showed a great variety of clinical problems regarding the investigation of a disease and the determination of a diagnosis. Eighty-nine per cent of the studies showed experimental models for clinical decision support system development. Seventy-eight per cent of the studies described the outcomes obtained with artificial intelligence technique. Two studies compared the clinical decision support system performance with that of a doctor, and only one research work described a controlled study evidencing improvements in the medical practice.
conclusionThe studies analyzed showed evidence of potential benefits that clinical decision support system can bring to the clinical practice. However, further controlled studies performed in medical day-to-day conditions and environment should be performed in order to provide more clear evidence of the usefulness of clinical decision support system in the medical practice.
Identifiers
26491625PMC4610740What 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.