ArticleImplementation science : IS2018
The GUIDES checklist: development of a tool to improve the successful use of guideline-based computerised clinical decision support.
Article in Implementation science : IS, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 73 papers, 7 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
73 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effectiveness of clinical decision support in fall prevention among older adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 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
- Do providers use computerized clinical decision support systems? A systematic review and meta-regression of clinical decision support uptake.Implementation science : IS · 2022Pooled it
- Consistency of decision support software-integrated telephone triage and associated factors: a systematic review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2021Pooled it
- A systematic review of theoretical constructs in CDS literature.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2021Pooled it
- Decision support tools to improve cancer diagnostic decision making in primary care: a systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2019Pooled it
- A systematic review of trials evaluating success factors of interventions with computerised clinical decision support.Implementation science : IS · 2018Pooled it
- Improving decision accuracy using a clinical decision support system for medical students during history-taking: a randomized clinical trial.BMC medical education · 2023Trial
- De-implementing opioid prescribing in a dental group practice: Lessons learned.Community dentistry and oral epidemiology · 2023Trial
- Clinical Decision Support with or without Shared Decision Making to Improve Preventive Cancer Care: A Cluster-Randomized Trial.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2022Trial
- Primary care clinicians' opinions before and after implementation of cancer screening and prevention clinical decision support in a clinic cluster-randomized control trial: a survey research study.BMC health services research · 2022Trial
- Pre-implementation adaptation of primary care cancer prevention clinical decision support in a predominantly rural healthcare system.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2020Trial
- Design and implementation of a clinical decision support tool for primary palliative Care for Emergency Medicine (PRIM-ER).BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2020Trial
- Computerized clinical decision support system for diabetes in primary care does not improve quality of care: a cluster-randomized controlled trial.Implementation science : IS · 2020 · on this mapTrial
- Barriers and facilitators to implementing cancer prevention clinical decision support in primary care: a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2019Trial
- Piloting a Clinical Decision Support System for Unintended Weight Loss in Primary Care: Mixed Methods Study on Early Cancer Detection.JMIR cancer · 2026Article
- The use of an innovative clinical decision support system focused on psychosocial vulnerabilities during pregnancy: the Born in Belgium Professionals Platform.BMC health services research · 2026Observational
- Article
- Discrepant treponemal test results: Identification of associated risk factors through machine learning technology in 18-year electronic medical records and national claims data.Biomedical journal · 2026Article
- Clinical Decision Support to Increase Naloxone Co-prescribing from the Inpatient Setting.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Observational
13 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundComputerised decision support (CDS) based on trustworthy clinical guidelines is a key component of a learning healthcare system. Research shows that the effectiveness of CDS is mixed. Multifaceted context, system, recommendation and implementation factors may potentially affect the success of CDS interventions. This paper describes the development of a checklist that is intended to support professionals to implement CDS successfully.
methodsWe developed the checklist through an iterative process that involved a systematic review of evidence and frameworks, a synthesis of the success factors identified in the review, feedback from an international expert panel that evaluated the checklist in relation to a list of desirable framework attributes, consultations with patients and healthcare consumers and pilot testing of the checklist.
resultsWe screened 5347 papers and selected 71 papers with relevant information on success factors for guideline-based CDS. From the selected papers, we developed a 16-factor checklist that is divided in four domains, i.e. the CDS context, content, system and implementation domains. The panel of experts evaluated the checklist positively as an instrument that could support people implementing guideline-based CDS across a wide range of settings globally. Patients and healthcare consumers identified guideline-based CDS as an important quality improvement intervention and perceived the GUIDES checklist as a suitable and useful strategy.
conclusionsThe GUIDES checklist can support professionals in considering the factors that affect the success of CDS interventions. It may facilitate a deeper and more accurate understanding of the factors shaping CDS effectiveness. Relying on a structured approach may prevent that important factors are missed.
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.