ArticleApplied clinical informatics2017
Evaluating a Modular Decision Support Application For Colorectal Cancer Screening.
Article in Applied clinical informatics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Optimizing Clinical Decision Support System Functionality by Leveraging Specific Human-Computer Interaction Elements: Insights From a Systematic Review.JMIR human factors · 2025Pooled it
- The impact of eHealth use on general practice workload in the pre-COVID-19 era: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2024Pooled it
- The Effect of an EHR Order Set on Cancer Screening Order Rates in Community-Based Health Centers.Applied clinical informatics · 2025Article
- Uptake of a Cervical Cancer Clinical Decision Support Tool: A Mixed-Methods Study.Applied clinical informatics · 2023Article
- Development of a Mobile-Based Self-care Application for Patients with Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema in Iran.Applied clinical informatics · 2022Article
- Digital Health Interventions to Enhance Prevention in Primary Care: Scoping Review.JMIR medical informatics · 2022Article
- Nutri: A Behavioral Science-Based Clinical Decision Support for Chronic Disease Management.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2022Article
- Patients Are Knowledge Workers in the Clinical Information Space.Applied clinical informatics · 2021Article
- Application of human factors to improve usability of clinical decision support for diagnostic decision-making: a scenario-based simulation study.BMJ quality & safety · 2020Article
- Mapping Patient Data to Colorectal Cancer Clinical Algorithms for Personalized Guideline-Based Treatment.Applied clinical informatics · 2020Article
- Decision-Centered Design of Patient Information Visualizations to Support Chronic Pain Care.Applied clinical informatics · 2019Article
- Thinking Big About Small Adenomas: Moving Toward "Precision Surveillance".The American journal of gastroenterology · 2018Article
- Designing Colorectal Cancer Screening Decision Support: A Cognitive Engineering Enterprise.Journal of cognitive engineering and decision making · 2016Article
- Impact of Mobile Device-Based Clinical Decision Support Tool on Guideline Adherence and Mental Workload.Academic pediatricsArticle
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
backgroundThere is a need for health information technology evaluation that goes beyond randomized controlled trials to include consideration of usability, cognition, feedback from representative users, and impact on efficiency, data quality, and clinical workflow. This article presents an evaluation illustrating one approach to this need using the Decision-Centered Design framework.
objectiveTo evaluate, through a Decision-Centered Design framework, the ability of the Screening and Surveillance App to support primary care clinicians in tracking and managing colorectal cancer testing.
methodsWe leveraged two evaluation formats, online and in-person, to obtain feedback from a range primary care clinicians and obtain comparative data. Both the online and in-person evaluations used mock patient data to simulate challenging patient scenarios. Primary care clinicians responded to a series of colorectal cancer-related questions about each patient and made recommendations for screening. We collected data on performance, perceived workload, and usability. Key elements of Decision-Centered Design include evaluation in the context of realistic, challenging scenarios and measures designed to explore impact on cognitive performance.
resultsComparison of means revealed increases in accuracy, efficiency, and usability and decreases in perceived mental effort and workload when using the Screening and Surveillance App.
conclusionThe results speak to the benefits of using the Decision-Centered Design approach in the analysis, design, and evaluation of Health Information Technology. Furthermore, the Screening and Surveillance App shows promise for filling decision support gaps in current electronic health records.
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.