Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33895828›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2021

Barriers to using clinical decision support in ambulatory care: Do clinics in health systems fare better?

Yunfeng Shi, Alejandro Amill-Rosario, Robert S Rudin, Shira H Fischer, Paul Shekelle, Dennis P Scanlon, Cheryl L Damberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Overcoming Barriers to Discovery and Implementation of Equitable Pharmacogenomic Testing in Oncology.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2024
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Yunfeng ShiDepartment of Health Policy and Administration, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA.
Alejandro Amill-RosarioDepartment of Health Policy and Administration, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA.
Robert S RudinRAND Corporation, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Shira H FischerRAND Corporation, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Paul ShekelleRAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California, USA.
Dennis P ScanlonDepartment of Health Policy and Administration, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA.
Cheryl L DambergRAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California, USA.

Funding

Understanding Health Care Delivery Systems PCOR Adoption and System PerformanceU19HS024067 · AHRQ · RAND CORPORATION · PI DAMBERG, CHERYL · 2015 to 2019
$17.4M
AHRQ HHS U19 HS024067
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWe quantify the use of clinical decision support (CDS) and the specific barriers reported by ambulatory clinics and examine whether CDS utilization and barriers differed based on clinics' affiliation with health systems, providing a benchmark for future empirical research and policies related to this topic. MATERIALS AND

methodsDespite much discussion at the theoretic level, the existing literature provides little empirical understanding of barriers to using CDS in ambulatory care. We analyze data from 821 clinics in 117 medical groups, based on in Minnesota Community Measurement's annual Health Information Technology Survey (2014-2016). We examine clinics' use of 7 CDS tools, along with 7 barriers in 3 areas (resource, user acceptance, and technology). Employing linear probability models, we examine factors associated with CDS barriers.

resultsClinics in health systems used more CDS tools than did clinics not in systems (24 percentage points higher in automated reminders), but they also reported more barriers related to resources and user acceptance (26 percentage points higher in barriers to implementation and 33 points higher in disruptive alarms). Barriers related to workflow redesign increased in clinics affiliated with health systems (33 points higher). Rural clinics were more likely to report barriers to training.

conclusionsCDS barriers related to resources and user acceptance remained substantial. Health systems, while being effective in promoting CDS tools, may need to provide further assistance to their affiliated ambulatory clinics to overcome barriers, especially the requirement to redesign workflow. Rural clinics may need more resources for training.

Indexed as

Decision Support Systems, ClinicalAmbulatory CareAmbulatory Care FacilitiesHumansSurveys and QuestionnairesWorkflowadoption barriersambulatory careclinical decision supporthealth systemsuser acceptance

Identifiers

PMID33895828
PMCPMC8324224

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.