ArticleJMIR human factors2022
Factors Influencing Clinician Trust in Predictive Clinical Decision Support Systems for In-Hospital Deterioration: Qualitative Descriptive Study.
Article in JMIR human factors, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
54 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Nurses' Experiences Using AI in Clinical Practice: Systematic Review.JMIR nursing · 2026Pooled it
- Task-Technology Fit of Artificial Intelligence-based clinical decision support systems: a review of qualitative studies.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Pooled it
- Implementation of Machine Learning Applications in Health Care Organizations: Systematic Review of Empirical Studies.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Pooled it
- Deployment of machine learning algorithms to predict sepsis: systematic review and application of the SALIENT clinical AI implementation framework.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2023Pooled it
- Real-time surveillance system for patient deterioration: a pragmatic cluster-randomized controlled trial.Nature medicine · 2025Trial
- An Evaluation of Clinician and Informatician Perspectives on Medication Harm Risk Prediction Tools for Use in a Tertiary Hospital Setting.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2026Article
- An interpretable data-driven approach to optimizing clinical fall risk assessment.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- How Can Clinicians Decide if AI-Enabled Risk Prediction Models Are Fit for Purpose for Real World Use?Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2026Article
- Determinants of Trust and Reliance on Artificial Intelligence in Clinical Settings: A Study on Physicians' Use of Large Language Model in Psychiatric Symptom Assessment.Psychiatry investigation · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence in nephrology: predicting CKD progression and personalizing treatment.International urology and nephrology · 2026Review
- Trust-driven healthy engagement with conversational AI for mental health support in young adults: a mixed methods study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Emotion-Adaptive Large Language Model-Driven Clinical Decision Support: User Evaluation of the Empathic Clinical Decision Support System Framework for Trust and Explainability.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
- Enhancing respiratory virus surveillance among hospitalised children: a machine learning-based predictive model.BMJ paediatrics open · 2026Article
- The Role of Explanations in AI-Generated Alerts: Qualitative Study of Clinical Views on Explainable AI in Predictive Tools.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
- Explainable AI in hospital clinical decision support systems: A scoping review of healthcare professionals' perspectives.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- The 'Hippocratic Oath' for AI-based clinical decision support systems.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Engaging Hospital Staff to Identify Levers for Adoption of Clinical Decision Support: Protocol for a Single-Site Case Study Using System Dynamics Group Model Building.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Integrated Implementation Strategies to Promote the Use of AI-Assisted Diagnostic Software for Lung Nodule Screening in China: Process Evaluation Based on the RE-AIM Framework.JMIR formative research · 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundClinician trust in machine learning-based clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) for predicting in-hospital deterioration (a type of predictive CDSS) is essential for adoption. Evidence shows that clinician trust in predictive CDSSs is influenced by perceived understandability and perceived accuracy.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to explore the phenomenon of clinician trust in predictive CDSSs for in-hospital deterioration by confirming and characterizing factors known to influence trust (understandability and accuracy), uncovering and describing other influencing factors, and comparing nurses' and prescribing providers' trust in predictive CDSSs.
methodsWe followed a qualitative descriptive methodology conducting directed deductive and inductive content analysis of interview data. Directed deductive analyses were guided by the human-computer trust conceptual framework. Semistructured interviews were conducted with nurses and prescribing providers (physicians, physician assistants, or nurse practitioners) working with a predictive CDSS at 2 hospitals in Mass General Brigham.
resultsA total of 17 clinicians were interviewed. Concepts from the human-computer trust conceptual framework-perceived understandability and perceived technical competence (ie, perceived accuracy)-were found to influence clinician trust in predictive CDSSs for in-hospital deterioration. The concordance between clinicians' impressions of patients' clinical status and system predictions influenced clinicians' perceptions of system accuracy. Understandability was influenced by system explanations, both global and local, as well as training. In total, 3 additional themes emerged from the inductive analysis. The first, perceived actionability, captured the variation in clinicians' desires for predictive CDSSs to recommend a discrete action. The second, evidence, described the importance of both macro- (scientific) and micro- (anecdotal) evidence for fostering trust. The final theme, equitability, described fairness in system predictions. The findings were largely similar between nurses and prescribing providers.
conclusionsAlthough there is a perceived trade-off between machine learning-based CDSS accuracy and understandability, our findings confirm that both are important for fostering clinician trust in predictive CDSSs for in-hospital deterioration. We found that reliance on the predictive CDSS in the clinical workflow may influence clinicians' requirements for trust. Future research should explore the impact of reliance, the optimal explanation design for enhancing understandability, and the role of perceived actionability in driving trust.
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.