ArticleBMC health services research2024
Exploring key components and factors that influence the use of clinical decision- support tools for prescribing to older patients with kidney disease: the perspective of healthcare providers.
Article in BMC health services research, 2024. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Emergency Department Clinician Preferences in the Management of New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2026Article
- Development of a Human Factors-Based Guideline to Support the Design, Evaluation, and Continuous Improvement of Clinical Decision Support.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health · 2025Article
- Clinicians' perspectives on the adoption and implementation of EMR-integrated clinical decision support tools in primary care.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClinical decision-support (CDS) tools are systems that provide healthcare providers (HCPs) with recommendations based on knowledge and patient-specific factors to facilitate informed decisions.
objectivesTo identify the key components of a CDS tool that are most important to HCPs in caring for older adults with kidney disease, and to understand the facilitators and barriers toward using CDS tools in daily clinical practice.
methodsDesign: A cross-sectional survey of Canadian HCPs was undertaken. DATA COLLECTION: Participants affiliated with a provincial college, nephrology organization, or advocacy body were contacted. The survey was conducted between August and October 2021. INSTRUMENT: A 59-item questionnaire was developed and divided into five main domains/themes. Analysis was done descriptively.
resultsSixty-three participants completed the questionnaire. Physicians (60%) and pharmacists (22%) comprised the majority of the participants. Most of the participants were specialized in nephrology (65%). The most important components in a CDS tool for prescribing to older patients with kidney disease were the safety and efficacy of the medication (89%), the goal of therapy (89%), and patient's quality of life (87%). 90% were willing to use CDS tools and 57% were already using some CDS tools for prescribing. The majority of the participants selected the validation of CDS tools (95%), accompanying the recommendations by the supporting evidence (84%), and the affiliation of the tools with known organizations (84%), as factors that facilitate the use of CDS tools.
conclusionCDS tools are being used and are accepted by HCPs and have value in their assistance in engaging patients in making well-informed decisions.
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.