ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2024
Developing and Testing the Usability of a Novel Child Abuse Clinical Decision Support System: Mixed Methods Study.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial Intelligence in Addressing Interpersonal Violence Against Vulnerable Populations: A Scoping Review.Revista brasileira de enfermagem · 2026Article
- Usability and feasibility of a mobile application for real-time trauma care guidance: considerations for user adoption.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDespite the impact of physical abuse on children, it is often underdiagnosed, especially among children evaluated in emergency departments (EDs). Electronic clinical decision support (CDS) can improve the recognition of child physical abuse.
objectiveWe aimed to develop and test the usability of a natural language processing-based child abuse CDS system, known as the Child Abuse Clinical Decision Support (CA-CDS), to alert ED clinicians about high-risk injuries suggestive of abuse in infants' charts.
methodsInformed by available evidence, a multidisciplinary team, including an expert in user design, developed the CA-CDS prototype that provided evidence-based recommendations for the evaluation and management of suspected child abuse when triggered by documentation of a high-risk injury. Content was customized for medical versus nursing providers and initial versus subsequent exposure to the alert. To assess the usability of and refine the CA-CDS, we interviewed 24 clinicians from 4 EDs about their interactions with the prototype. Interview transcripts were coded and analyzed using conventional content analysis.
resultsOverall, 5 main categories of themes emerged from the study. CA-CDS benefits included providing an extra layer of protection, providing evidence-based recommendations, and alerting the entire clinical ED team. The user-centered, workflow-compatible design included soft-stop alert configuration, editable and automatic documentation, and attention-grabbing formatting. Recommendations for improvement included consolidating content, clearer design elements, and adding a hyperlink with additional resources. Barriers to future implementation included alert fatigue, hesitancy to change, and concerns regarding documentation. Facilitators of future implementation included stakeholder buy-in, provider education, and sharing the test characteristics. On the basis of user feedback, iterative modifications were made to the prototype.
conclusionsWith its user-centered design and evidence-based content, the CA-CDS can aid providers in the real-time recognition and evaluation of infant physical abuse and has the potential to reduce the number of missed cases.
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.