Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26946141›Full record

ArticleImplementation science : IS2016

Tailoring implementation strategies for evidence-based recommendations using computerised clinical decision support systems: protocol for the development of the GUIDES tools.

Stijn Van de Velde, Pavel Roshanov, Tiina Kortteisto, Ilkka Kunnamo, Bert Aertgeerts, Per Olav Vandvik, Signe Flottorp

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science : IS, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. What Role Can Process Mining Play in Recurrent Clinical Guidelines Issues? A Position Paper.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Stijn Van de VeldeNorwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway. Stijn.vandevelde@fhi.no.
Pavel RoshanovMcMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Tiina KortteistoTampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland.
Ilkka KunnamoDuodecim, Scientific Society of Finnish Physicians, Helsinki, Finland.
Bert AertgeertsDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Per Olav VandvikMAGIC Non-Profit Research and Innovation Programme, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Signe FlottorpNorwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA computerised clinical decision support system (CCDSS) is a technology that uses patient-specific data to provide relevant medical knowledge at the point of care. It is considered to be an important quality improvement intervention, and the implementation of CCDSS is growing substantially. However, the significant investments do not consistently result in value for money due to content, context, system and implementation issues. The Guideline Implementation with Decision Support (GUIDES) project aims to improve the impact of CCDSS through optimised implementation based on high-quality evidence-based recommendations. To achieve this, we will develop tools that address the factors that determine successful CCDSS implementation. METHODS/

designWe will develop the GUIDES tools in four steps, using the methods and results of the Tailored Implementation for Chronic Diseases (TICD) project as a starting point: (1) a review of research evidence and frameworks on the determinants of implementing recommendations using CCDSS; (2) a synthesis of a comprehensive framework for the identified determinants; (3) the development of tools for use of the framework and (4) pilot testing the utility of the tools through the development of a tailored CCDSS intervention in Norway, Belgium and Finland. We selected the conservative management of knee osteoarthritis as a prototype condition for the pilot. During the process, the authors will collaborate with an international expert group to provide input and feedback on the tools. DISCUSSION: This project will provide guidance and tools on methods of identifying implementation determinants and selecting strategies to implement evidence-based recommendations through CCDSS. We will make the GUIDES tools available to CCDSS developers, implementers, researchers, funders, clinicians, managers, educators, and policymakers internationally. The tools and recommendations will be generic, which makes them scalable to a large spectrum of conditions. Ultimately, the better implementation of CCDSS may lead to better-informed decisions and improved care and patient outcomes for a wide range of conditions. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, CRD42016033738.

Indexed as

Clinical ProtocolsDecision Support Systems, ClinicalEvidence-Based MedicineBelgiumChronic DiseaseFinlandHumansNorwayOsteoarthritis, KneePilot ProjectsQuality Improvement

Identifiers

PMID26946141
PMCPMC4779557

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.