ArticleJMIR human factors2024
Evaluation of a Computer-Aided Clinical Decision Support System for Point-of-Care Use in Low-Resource Primary Care Settings: Acceptability Evaluation Study.
Article in JMIR human factors, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The implementation challenge of computerised clinical decision support systems for the detection of disease in primary care: systematic review and recommendations.Implementation science : IS · 2025Pooled it
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA clinical decision support system (CDSS) based on the logic and philosophy of clinical pathways is critical for managing the quality of health care and for standardizing care processes. Using such a system at a point-of-care setting is becoming more frequent these days. However, in a low-resource setting (LRS), such systems are frequently overlooked.
objectiveThe purpose of the study was to evaluate the user acceptance of a CDSS in LRSs.
methodsThe CDSS evaluation was carried out at the Jimma Health Center and the Jimma Higher Two Health Center, Jimma, Ethiopia. The evaluation was based on 22 parameters organized into 6 categories: ease of use, system quality, information quality, decision changes, process changes, and user acceptance. A Mann-Whitney U test was used to investigate whether the difference between the 2 health centers was significant (2-tailed, 95% CI; α=.05). Pearson correlation and partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) was used to identify the relationship and factors influencing the overall acceptance of the CDSS in an LRS.
resultsOn the basis of 116 antenatal care, pregnant patient care, and postnatal care cases, 73 CDSS evaluation responses were recorded. We found that the 2 health centers did not differ significantly on 16 evaluation parameters. We did, however, detect a statistically significant difference in 6 parameters (P<.05). PLS-SEM results showed that the coefficient of determination, R
conclusionsThis study concludes that users are more likely to accept and use a CDSS at the point of care when it is easy to grasp the perceived benefits and system quality in terms of health care professionals' needs. We believe that the CDSS acceptance model developed in this study reveals specific factors and variables that constitute a step toward the effective adoption and deployment of a CDSS in LRSs.
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.