ArticleJournal of technology in behavioral science2021
Primary care clinicians' perspectives on clinical decision support to enhance outcomes of online obesity treatment in primary care: A qualitative formative evaluation.
Article in Journal of technology in behavioral science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Implementing a Machine Learning Screening Tool for Malnutrition: Insights From Qualitative Research Applicable to Other Machine Learning-Based Clinical Decision Support Systems.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- Pragmatic implementation of a fully automated online obesity treatment in primary care.Obesity (Silver Spring, Md.) · 2022Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveOnline behavioral treatment for obesity produces clinically-meaningful weight losses among many primary care patients. However, some patients experience poor outcomes (i.e., failure to enroll post-referral, poor weight loss, or premature disengagement). This study sought to understand primary care clinicians' perceived utility of a clinical decision support system (CDSS) that would alert clinicians to patients' risk for poor outcome and guide clinician-delivered rescue interventions to reduce risk.
methodsQualitative formative evaluation was conducted in the context of an ongoing pragmatic clinical trial implementing online obesity treatment in primary care. Interviews were conducted with 14 nurse care managers (NCMs) overseeing patients' online obesity treatment. Interviews inquired about the potential utility of CDSS in primary care, desired alert frequency/format, and priorities for alert types (non-enrollment, poor weight loss, and/or early disengagement). We used matrix analysis to generate common themes across interviews.
resultsNearly all NCMs viewed CDSS as potentially helpful in clinical practice. Alerts for patients at risk for disengagement were of highest priority, though all alert types were generally viewed as desirable. Regarding frequency and delivery mode of patient alerts, NCMs wanted to balance the need for prompt patient intervention with minimizing clinician burden. Concerns about CDSS emerged, including insufficient time to respond promptly and adequately to alerts and the need to involve other support staff for patients requiring ongoing rescue intervention.
conclusionsNCMs view CDSS for online obesity treatment as potentially feasible and clinically useful. For optimal implementation in primary care, CDSS must minimize clinician burden and facilitate collaborative care.
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.