Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37494970›Full record

ArticleApplied clinical informatics2023

Lessons Learned from a National Initiative Promoting Publicly Available Standards-Based Clinical Decision Support.

Rina V Dhopeshwarkar, Maysoun Freij, Melissa Callaham, Priyanka J Desai, Michael I Harrison, James Swiger, Edwin A Lomotan, Chris Dymek, Prashila Dullabh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied clinical informatics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

9 authors.

Rina V DhopeshwarkarDepartment of Health Sciences, NORC at the University of Chicago, Bethesda, Maryland, United States.
Maysoun FreijDepartment of Health Care Evaluation, NORC at the University of Chicago, Bethesda, Maryland, United States.
Melissa CallahamDepartment of Health Sciences, NORC at the University of Chicago, Bethesda, Maryland, United States.
Priyanka J DesaiDepartment of Health Sciences, NORC at the University of Chicago, Bethesda, Maryland, United States.
Michael I HarrisonCenter for Evidence and Practice Improvement, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, Maryland, United States.
James SwigerCenter for Evidence and Practice Improvement, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, Maryland, United States.
Edwin A LomotanCenter for Evidence and Practice Improvement, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, Maryland, United States.
Chris DymekCenter for Evidence and Practice Improvement, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, Maryland, United States.
Prashila DullabhDepartment of Health Sciences, NORC at the University of Chicago, Bethesda, Maryland, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinical decision support (CDS), which provides tools to assist clinical decision-making, can improve adherence to evidence-based practices, prevent medical errors, and support high-quality and patient-centered care delivery. Publicly available CDS that uses standards to express clinical logic (i.e., standards-based CDS) has the potential to reduce duplicative efforts of translating the same clinical evidence into CDS across multiple health care institutions. Yet development of such CDS is relatively new and its potential only partially explored.

objectivesThis study aimed to describe lessons learned from a national initiative promoting publicly available, standards-based CDS resources, discuss challenges, and report suggestions for improvement.

methodsFindings were drawn from an evaluation of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Patient-Centered Outcomes Research CDS Initiative, which aimed to advance evidence into practice through standards-based and publicly available CDS. Methods included literature and program material reviews, key informant interviews, and a web-based survey about a public repository of CDS artifacts and tools for authoring standards-based CDS.

resultsThe evaluation identified important lessons for developing and implementing standards-based CDS through publicly available repositories such as CDS Connect. Trust is a critical factor in uptake and can be bolstered through transparent information on underlying evidence, collaboration with experts, and feedback loops between users and developers to support continuous improvement. Additionally, while adoption of standards among electronic health record developers will make it easier to implement standards-based CDS, lower-resourced health systems will need extra support to ensure successful implementation and use. Finally, although we found the resources developed by the Initiative to offer valuable prototypes for the field, health systems desire more information about patient-centered, clinical, and cost-related outcomes to help them justify the investment required to implement standards-based, publicly available CDS.

conclusionWhile the standards and technology to publicly share standards-based CDS have increased, broad dissemination and implementation remain challenging.

Indexed as

Decision Support Systems, ClinicalClinical Decision-MakingDelivery of Health CareElectronic Health RecordsHumansMedical Errors

Identifiers

PMID37494970
PMCPMC10371399

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.