Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36410838›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

Barriers and facilitators to use of a digital clinical decision support tool: a cohort study combining clickstream and survey data.

Julie Rosenberg, Kate Miller, Olivia Pickard, Natalie Henrich, Ami Karlage, Rebecca Weintraub

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

6 authors.

Julie RosenbergAriadne Labs, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA jrosenberg@ariadnelabs.org.ORCID 0000-0003-0961-0692
Kate MillerAriadne Labs, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Olivia PickardAriadne Labs, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Natalie HenrichAriadne Labs, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Ami KarlageAriadne Labs, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Rebecca WeintraubAriadne Labs, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis research aimed to understand the barriers and facilitators clinicians face in using a digital clinical decision support tool-UpToDate-around the globe.

designWe used a mixed-methods cohort study design that enrolled 1681 clinicians (physicians, surgeons or physician assistants) who applied for free access to UpToDate through our established donation programme during a 9-week study enrolment period. Eligibility included working outside of the USA for a limited-resource public or non-profit health facility, serving vulnerable populations, having at least intermittent internet access, completing the application in English; and not being otherwise able to afford the subscription.

interventionAfter consenting to study participation, clinicians received a 1-year subscription to UpToDate. They completed a series of surveys over the year, and we collected clickstream data tracking their use of the tool. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: (1) The variation in use by demographic; (2) the prevalence of barriers and facilitators of use; and (3) the relationship between barriers, facilitators and use.

resultsOf 1681 study enrollees, 69% were men and 71% were between 25 and 35 years old, with the plurality practicing general medicine and the majority in sub-Saharan Africa or Southeast Asia. Of the 11 barriers we assessed, fitting the tool into the workflow was a statistically significant barrier, making clinicians 50% less likely to use it. Of the 10 facilitators we assessed, a supportive professional context and utility were significant drivers of use.

conclusionsThere are several clear barriers and facilitators to promoting the use of digital clinical decision support tools in practice. We recommend tools like UpToDate be implemented with complementary services. These include generating a supportive professional context, helping clinicians realise the tools' use and working with health systems to better integrate digital, clinical decision support tools into workflows.

Indexed as

Decision Support Systems, ClinicalGeneral PracticeSurgeonsAdultCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMaleWorkflowchange managementhealth & safetyinformation technologyinternational health servicesmedical education & trainingquality in health care

Identifiers

PMID36410838
PMCPMC9680158

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.