ReviewYearbook of medical informatics2023
The Impact of Clinical Decision Support on Health Disparities and the Digital Divide.
Review in Yearbook of medical informatics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Why do users override alerts? Utilizing large language model to summarize comments and optimize clinical decision support.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024Article
- Advances in Clinical Decision Support Systems: Contributions from the 2022 Literature.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2023Article
- Informatics for One Health.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis literature review summarizes relevant studies from the last three years (2020-2022) related to clinical decision support (CDS) and CDS impact on health disparities and the digital divide. This survey identifies current trends and synthesizes evidence-based recommendations and considerations for future development and implementation of CDS tools.
methodsWe conducted a search in PubMed for literature published between 2020 and 2022. Our search strategy was constructed as a combination of the MEDLINE®/PubMed® Health Disparities and Minority Health Search Strategy and relevant CDS MeSH terms and phrases. We then extracted relevant data from the studies, including priority population when applicable, domain of influence on the disparity being addressed, and the type of CDS being used. We also made note of when a study discussed the digital divide in some capacity and organized the comments into general themes through group discussion.
resultsOur search yielded 520 studies, with 45 included at the conclusion of screening. The most frequent CDS type in this review was point-of-care alerts/reminders (33.3%). Health Care System was the most frequent domain of influence (71.1%), and Blacks/African Americans were the most frequently included priority population (42.2%). Throughout the literature, we found four general themes related to the technology divide: inaccessibility of technology, access to care, trust of technology, and technology literacy.This survey revealed the diversity of CDS being used to address health disparities and several barriers which may make CDS less effective or potentially harmful to certain populations. Regular examinations of literature that feature CDS and address health disparities can help to reveal new strategies and patterns for improving healthcare.
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.