ArticleDigital health
General practitioners' user experience of the nationwide digital decision support system in primary care.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of the study is to describe the user experiences of a nationwide digital decision support system (DDSS). Summary of background data: DDSSs have the potential to improve the quality and safety of healthcare services by supporting clinical decision-making with evidence-based recommendations. Due to a lack of knowledge, it is difficult to assess whether DDSSs are fulfilling their purpose. In Estonia, a nationwide DDSS for general practitioners (GPs) was implemented in 2020. To understand the impact of DDSS on the quality of care in the Estonian context and meet the demands of healthcare, it is necessary to gather information about the experiences of the users. This is the first study that examines the experiences of GPs on the use of DDSS nationwide. Methods: A qualitative descriptive study was conducted based on snowball sampling. Semi-structured interviews were performed in February-March 2022 with nine GPs. Data were analyzed by thematic analysis. A total of six themes and 16 subthemes emerged from the data. Results: A total of six themes and 16 subthemes emerged from the data. The following themes were identified: user-friendliness, DDSS use in clinical practice, benefits of the DDSS, and the impact of the DDSS on GPs' work, barriers to using the DDSS, and suggestions for improving the user experience. The results of the study are important, as they address and contribute to the relevant aspects of digital health in primary care. Conclusion: GPs shared their individual user experiences, including user-perceived barriers and enabling factors that influence the implementation and use of a decision support system in primary care settings. It is revealed that GPs have different benefits and barriers depending on the topic discussed. Future research should evaluate the functioning of the DDSS and the quality of the decisions it provides by observing and evaluating patient records. Systematic user experiences need to be collected and examined to ensure the usability and sustainability of the DDSS.
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.