Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37284487›Full record

ReviewJournal of healthcare engineering2023

The Application of Knowledge-Based Clinical Decision Support Systems to Enhance Adherence to Evidence-Based Medicine in Chronic Disease.

Marsa Gholamzadeh, Hamidreza Abtahi, Reza Safdari

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of healthcare engineering, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Architectural design of national evidence based medicine information system based on electronic health record.Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
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.

Marsa GholamzadehMedical Informatics, Health Information Management and Medical Informatics Department, School of Allied Medical Sciences, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.ORCID 0000-0001-6781-9342
Hamidreza AbtahiPulmonary and Critical Care Department, Thoracic Research Center, Imam Khomeini Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.ORCID 0000-0002-1111-0497
Reza SafdariHealth Information Management and Medical Informatics Department, School of Allied Medical Sciences, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.ORCID 0000-0002-4982-337X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Among the technology-based solutions, clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) have the ability to keep up with clinicians with the latest evidence in a smart way. Hence, the main objective of our study was to investigate the applicability and characteristics of CDSSs regarding chronic disease. The Web of Science, Scopus, OVID, and PubMed databases were searched using keywords from January 2000 to February 2023. The review was completed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses checklist. Then, an analysis was done to determine the characteristics and applicability of CDSSs. The quality of the appraisal was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool checklist (MMAT). A systematic database search yielded 206 citations. Eventually, 38 articles from sixteen countries met the inclusion criteria and were accepted for final analysis. The main approaches of all studies can be classified into adherence to evidence-based medicine (84.2%), early and accurate diagnosis (81.6%), identifying high-risk patients (50%), preventing medical errors (47.4%), providing up-to-date information to healthcare providers (36.8%), providing patient care remotely (21.1%), and standardizing care (71.1%). The most common features among the knowledge-based CDSSs included providing guidance and advice for physicians (92.11%), generating patient-specific recommendations (84.21%), integrating into electronic medical records (60.53%), and using alerts or reminders (60.53%). Among thirteen different methods to translate the knowledge of evidence into machine-interpretable knowledge, 34.21% of studies utilized the rule-based logic technique while 26.32% of studies used rule-based decision tree modeling. For CDSS development and translating knowledge, diverse methods and techniques were applied. Therefore, the development of a standard framework for the development of knowledge-based decision support systems should be considered by informaticians.

Indexed as

Decision Support Systems, ClinicalChronic DiseaseElectronic Health RecordsEvidence-Based MedicineExpert SystemsHumans

Identifiers

PMID37284487
PMCPMC10241579

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.