ArticleBMC primary care2023
Workload and workflow implications associated with the use of electronic clinical decision support tools used by health professionals in general practice: a scoping review.
Article in BMC primary care, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 6 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
25 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The Impact of Digitalization on European General Practice From the Perspective of General Practitioners: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Preferences for AI-Enabled Health Care Technologies: Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments and Reporting Quality Assessment Using the DIRECT Checklist.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Why aren't they used? Systematic review of barriers to implementation of clinical decision support systems for early cancer detection in primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026Pooled it
- The implementation challenge of computerised clinical decision support systems for the detection of disease in primary care: systematic review and recommendations.Implementation science : IS · 2025Pooled it
- The impact of eHealth use on general practice workload in the pre-COVID-19 era: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Influence of a clinical decision support system on the anticoagulation treatment knowledge, attitude and practice of general practitioners and their using experience: a mixed method study.BMC primary care · 2026Trial
- Digital Health Revolution in Saudi Arabia: A Narrative Review of Healthcare Transformation.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Exploring primary care providers' perspectives on clinical decision support for venous thromboembolism diagnosis: a qualitative study.BMJ open · 2026Article
- The GUIDE-CDSS framework: a comprehensive framework to GUIDE and evaluate the implementation of Clinical Decision Support Systems in healthcare, based on an overview of reviews.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026Review
- Leveraging Real-World Data for Clinical Decision Making in Geriatric Oncology.Drugs & aging · 2026Review
- Adoption and Efficiency of an Anesthesia Information Management System: Evaluation of Workflow Integration in Perioperative Care.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Right Idea, Wrong Time: Focusing on Alert Timing for Effective Decision Support.Applied clinical informatics · 2025Article
- Clinical Decision-Making and Use of Clinical Decision Support When Clinicians are Fatigued in an Emergency Department: A Qualitative Study.Applied clinical informatics · 2025Article
- Electronic health record activity changes around new decision support implementation: monitoring using audit logs and topic modeling.JAMIA open · 2025Article
- Development and implementation of a digital clinical decision support system to increase the quality of primary healthcare delivery in a refugee setting in Chad.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- Levels of Telehealth Use, Perceived Usefulness, and Ease of Use in Behavioral Healthcare Organizations After the COVID-19 Pandemic.The journal of behavioral health services & research · 2025Article
- Balancing specialist roles with generalist responsibilities in primary care: have we gone too far?Frontiers in health services · 2025Article
- Electronic health record and primary care physician self-reported quality of care: a multilevel study in China.Global health action · 2024Article
- The feasibility of integrating an alcohol screening clinical decision support tool into primary care clinical software: a review and Australian key stakeholder study.BMC primary care · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundElectronic clinical decision support tools (eCDS) are increasingly available to assist General Practitioners (GP) with the diagnosis and management of a range of health conditions. It is unclear whether the use of eCDS tools has an impact on GP workload. This scoping review aimed to identify the available evidence on the use of eCDS tools by health professionals in general practice in relation to their impact on workload and workflow.
methodsA scoping review was carried out using the Arksey and O'Malley methodological framework. The search strategy was developed iteratively, with three main aspects: general practice/primary care contexts, risk assessment/decision support tools, and workload-related factors. Three databases were searched in 2019, and updated in 2021, covering articles published since 2009: Medline (Ovid), HMIC (Ovid) and Web of Science (TR). Double screening was completed by two reviewers, and data extracted from included articles were analysed.
resultsThe search resulted in 5,594 references, leading to 95 full articles, referring to 87 studies, after screening. Of these, 36 studies were based in the USA, 21 in the UK and 11 in Australia. A further 18 originated from Canada or Europe, with the remaining studies conducted in New Zealand, South Africa and Malaysia. Studies examined the use of eCDS tools and reported some findings related to their impact on workload, including on consultation duration. Most studies were qualitative and exploratory in nature, reporting health professionals' subjective perceptions of consultation duration as opposed to objectively-measured time spent using tools or consultation durations. Other workload-related findings included impacts on cognitive workload, "workflow" and dialogue with patients, and clinicians' experience of "alert fatigue".
conclusionsThe published literature on the impact of eCDS tools in general practice showed that limited efforts have focused on investigating the impact of such tools on workload and workflow. To gain an understanding of this area, further research, including quantitative measurement of consultation durations, would be useful to inform the future design and implementation of eCDS tools.
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.