ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2018
Clinical pathways for primary care: current use, interest and perceived usability.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Clinical pathways and patient-related outcomes in hospital-based settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis · 2021Pooled it
- Barriers to and facilitators of the implementation of multi-disciplinary care pathways in primary care: a systematic review.BMC family practice · 2020Pooled it
- A framework for clinical care pathway renewal: an example from inflammatory bowel disease.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Article
- Development and validity testing of a matrix to evaluate maturity of clinical pathways: a case study in Saskatchewan, Canada.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Management of non-specific low back pain in primary care - A systematic overview of recommendations from international evidence-based guidelines.Primary health care research & development · 2020Article
- Towards a New System for the Assessment of the Quality in Care Pathways: An Overview of Systematic Reviews.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Translating clinical evidence to daily practice remains a challenge and may improve with clinical pathways. We assessed interest in and usability of clinical pathways by primary care professionals. Methods: An online survey was created. Interest in pathways for patient care and learning was assessed at start and finish. Participants completed baseline questions then pathway-associated question sets related to management of 2 chronic diseases. Perceived pathway usability was assessed using the system usability scale. Accuracy and confidence of answers was compared for baseline and pathway-assisted questions. Results: Of 115 participants, 17.4% had used clinical pathways, the lowest of decision support tool types surveyed. Accuracy and confidence in answers significantly improved for all pathways. Interest in using pathways daily or weekly was above 75% for the respondents. Conclusion: There is low utilization of, but high interest in, clinical pathways by primary care clinicians. Pathways improve accuracy and confidence in answering written clinical questions.
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.