Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34498063›Full record

SynthesisJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2021

Automation in nursing decision support systems: A systematic review of effects on decision making, care delivery, and patient outcomes.

Saba Akbar, David Lyell, Farah Magrabi

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

Saba AkbarCentre for Health Informatics, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8986-3296
David LyellCentre for Health Informatics, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2695-0368
Farah MagrabiCentre for Health Informatics, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8426-5588

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe study sought to summarize research literature on nursing decision support systems (DSSs ); understand which steps of the nursing care process (NCP) are supported by DSSs, and analyze effects of automated information processing on decision making, care delivery, and patient outcomes. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe conducted a systematic review in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched from January 2014 to April 2020 for studies focusing on DSSs used exclusively by nurses and their effects. Information about the stages of automation (information acquisition, information analysis, decision and action selection, and action implementation), NCP, and effects was assessed.

resultsOf 1019 articles retrieved, 28 met the inclusion criteria, each studying a unique DSS. Most DSSs were concerned with two NCP steps: assessment (82%) and intervention (86%). In terms of automation, all included DSSs automated information analysis and decision selection. Five DSSs automated information acquisition and only one automated action implementation. Effects on decision making, care delivery, and patient outcome were mixed. DSSs improved compliance with recommendations and reduced decision time, but impacts were not always sustainable. There were improvements in evidence-based practice, but impact on patient outcomes was mixed.

conclusionsCurrent nursing DSSs do not adequately support the NCP and have limited automation. There remain many opportunities to enhance automation, especially at the stage of information acquisition. Further research is needed to understand how automation within the NCP can improve nurses' decision making, care delivery, and patient outcomes.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareNursing ProcessAutomationDecision MakingHumansautomationclinical decision support systemsnursing informaticspatient safety

Identifiers

PMID34498063
PMCPMC8510331

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.