ArticleJAMIA open2019
A qualitative framework-based evaluation of radiology clinical decision support initiatives: eliciting key factors to physician adoption in implementation.
Article in JAMIA open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
- Implementation of Electronic Clinical Decision Support for Radiology Referrals: The Role of Governance, Clinician Engagement and Education.Emergency medicine Australasia : EMA · 2026Article
- A scoping review, novel taxonomy and catalogue of implementation frameworks for clinical decision support systems.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2024Article
- Identifying Facilitators and Barriers to Implementation of AI-Assisted Clinical Decision Support in an Electronic Health Record System.Journal of medical systems · 2024Article
- Creation of an Evidence-Based Implementation Framework for Digital Health Technology in the Intensive Care Unit: Qualitative Study.JMIR formative research · 2022Article
- Article
- Implementation of artificial intelligence (AI) applications in radiology: hindering and facilitating factors.European radiology · 2020Article
- Considerations for Designing EHR-Embedded Clinical Decision Support Systems for Antimicrobial Stewardship in Pediatric Emergency Departments.Applied clinical informatics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo illustrate key contextual factors that may have effects on clinical decision support (CDS) adoption and, ultimately, success. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe conducted a qualitative evaluation of 2 similar radiology CDS innovations for near-term endpoints affecting adoption and present the findings using an evaluation framework. We identified key contextual factors between these 2 innovations and determined important adoption differences between them.
resultsDegree of electronic health record integration, approach to education and training, key drivers of adoption, and tailoring of the CDS to the clinical context were handled differently between the 2 innovations, contributing to variation in their relative degrees of adoption and use. Attention to these factors had impacts on both near and later-term measures of success (eg, patient outcomes). DISCUSSION: CDS adoption is a well-studied early-term measure of CDS success that directly impacts outcomes. Adoption requires attention throughout the design phases of an intervention especially to key factors directly affecting it, including how implementation across multiple sites and systems complicates adoption, which prior experience with CDS matters, and that practice guidelines invariably require tailoring to the clinical context.
conclusionWith better planning for the capture of early-term measures of successful CDS implementation, especially adoption, critical adjustments may be made to ensure that the CDS is effectively implemented to be successful.
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.