ArticleJournal of cognitive engineering and decision making2016
Designing Colorectal Cancer Screening Decision Support: A Cognitive Engineering Enterprise.
Article in Journal of cognitive engineering and decision making, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Why aren't they used? Systematic review of barriers to implementation of clinical decision support systems for early cancer detection in primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026Pooled it
- The implementation challenge of computerised clinical decision support systems for the detection of disease in primary care: systematic review and recommendations.Implementation science : IS · 2025Pooled it
- Elderly Medication Adherence Intervention Using the My Interventional Drug-Eluting Stent Educational App: Multisite Randomized Feasibility Trial.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2020Trial
- Using human factors methods to mitigate bias in artificial intelligence-based clinical decision support.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025Article
- Human-centered design of team health IT for pediatric trauma care transitions.International journal of medical informatics · 2022Article
- Patient Adherence to Therapy After Myocardial Infarction: A Scoping Review.Patient preference and adherence · 2022Article
- Decision-centered design of a clinical decision support system for acute management of pediatric congenital heart disease.Frontiers in digital health · 2022Article
- Healthcare information systems: the cognitive challenge.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2018Article
- Evaluating a Modular Decision Support Application For Colorectal Cancer Screening.Applied clinical informatics · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Adoption of clinical decision support has been limited. Important barriers include an emphasis on algorithmic approaches to decision support that do not align well with clinical work flow and human decision strategies, and the expense and challenge of developing, implementing, and refining decision support features in existing electronic health records (EHRs). We applied decision-centered design to create a modular software application to support physicians in managing and tracking colorectal cancer screening. Using decision-centered design facilitates a thorough understanding of cognitive support requirements from an end user perspective as a foundation for design. In this project, we used an iterative design process, including ethnographic observation and cognitive task analysis, to move from an initial design concept to a working modular software application called the Screening & Surveillance App. The beta version is tailored to work with the Veterans Health Administration's EHR Computerized Patient Record System (CPRS). Primary care providers using the beta version Screening & Surveillance App more accurately answered questions about patients and found relevant information more quickly compared to those using CPRS alone. Primary care providers also reported reduced mental effort and rated the Screening & Surveillance App positively for usability.
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.