ArticleClinical medicine (London, England)2020
What do senior physicians think about AI and clinical decision support systems: Quantitative and qualitative analysis of data from specialty societies.
Article in Clinical medicine (London, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stakeholder Perspectives of Clinical Artificial Intelligence Implementation: Systematic Review of Qualitative Evidence.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Pooled it
- Real-World Barriers to and Facilitators of Implementing AI-Based Clinical Decision Support Systems: Scoping Review.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- AI and clinicians growing together: A cross-sectional survey of clinicians' attitudes toward AI-CDSS with comparison to 2020 data.Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2026Article
- Qualitative Evaluation of a Clinical Decision-Support Tool for Improving Anticoagulation Control in Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation in Primary Care.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Healthcare professionals' perspectives on artificial intelligence in clinical practice: a systematic review of facilitators and challenges.Oxford open digital health · 2026Article
- Review
- Digital clinical decision support to improve care and to save costs: a pilot survey of the views of frontline healthcare professionals.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) · 2025Article
- Mapping artificial intelligence adoption in hepatology practice and research: challenges and opportunities in MENA region.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Assessing and Addressing Model Trustworthiness Trade-offs in Trauma Triage.International journal of artificial intelligence tools : architectures, languages, algorithms · 2024Article
- Exploring the feasibility of an artificial intelligence based clinical decision support system for cutaneous melanoma detection in primary care - a mixed method study.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2024Article
- Doctors' perception on the ethical use of AI-enabled clinical decision support systems for antibiotic prescribing recommendations in Singapore.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Physicians' Perspectives on AI in Clinical Decision Support Systems: Interview Study of the CURATE.AI Personalized Dose Optimization Platform.JMIR human factors · 2023Article
- Identifying barriers and facilitators to successful implementation of computerized clinical decision support systems in hospitals: a NASSS framework-informed scoping review.Implementation science : IS · 2023Article
- The voice of healthcare: introducing digital decision support systems into clinical practice - a qualitative study.BMC primary care · 2023Article
- Learning meaningful latent space representations for patient risk stratification: Model development and validation for dengue and other acute febrile illness.Frontiers in digital health · 2023Article
- Impact of COVID-19 on glaucoma management: A review.Frontiers in ophthalmology · 2022Review
- Acceptance of clinical artificial intelligence among physicians and medical students: A systematic review with cross-sectional survey.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Artificial intelligence in breast cancer screening: primary care provider preferences.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021Article
- Examining the effect of explanation on satisfaction and trust in AI diagnostic systems.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2021Article
- Enhancing trust in clinical decision support systems: a framework for developers.BMJ health & care informatics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThe aim was to help physicians engage with NHS and other policymakers about the use, procurement and regulation of artificial intelligence, algorithms and clinical decision support systems (CDSS) in the NHS by identifying the professional benefits of and concerns about these systems.
methodsWe piloted a three-page survey instrument with closed and open-ended questions on SurveyMonkey, then circulated it to specialty societies via email. Both quantitative and qualitative methods were used to analyse responses.
resultsThe results include the current usage of CDSS; identified benefits; concerns about quality; concerns about regulation, professional practice, ethics and liability, as well as actions being taken by the specialty societies to address these; and aspects of CDSS quality that need to be tested.
conclusionWhile results confirm many expected benefits and concerns about CDSS, they raise new professional concerns and suggest further actions to explore with partners on behalf of the physician community.
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.