ArticleJMIR medical informatics2024
Applying the Non-Adoption, Abandonment, Scale-up, Spread, and Sustainability Framework Across Implementation Stages to Identify Key Strategies to Facilitate Clinical Decision Support System Integration Within a Large Metropolitan Health Service: Interview and Focus Group Study.
Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Nursing Implementation Complexity Tool for Digital Technology Implementation in Nursing: Design Science Research Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- The Utility of Artificial Intelligence in Dermatology Training and Practice: A National, Cross-Sectional Study.The Australasian journal of dermatology · 2026Article
- An exploratory mixed-methods study using the ELICIT framework to identify stakeholder-informed implementation strategies for a population health platform.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Implementing an Artificial Intelligence Decision Support System in Radiology: Prospective Qualitative Evaluation Study Using the Nonadoption Abandonment Scale-Up, Spread, and Sustainability (NASSS) Framework.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Hospital information systems evaluation criteria: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Value of a Nationwide University Network in scaling up telemonitoring: a qualitative study.BMJ health & care informatics · 2025Article
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
backgroundComputerized clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) enhance patient care through real-time, evidence-based guidance for health care professionals. Despite this, the effective implementation of these systems for health services presents multifaceted challenges, leading to inappropriate use and abandonment over the course of time. Using the Non-Adoption, Abandonment, Scale-Up, Spread, and Sustainability (NASSS) framework, this qualitative study examined CDSS adoption in a metropolitan health service, identifying determinants across implementation stages to optimize CDSS integration into health care practice.
objectiveThis study aims to identify the theory-informed (NASSS) determinants, which included multiple CDSS interventions across a 2-year period, both at the health-service level and at the individual hospital setting, that either facilitate or hinder the application of CDSSs within a metropolitan health service. In addition, this study aimed to map these determinants onto specific stages of the implementation process, thereby developing a system-level understanding of CDSS application across implementation stages.
methodsParticipants involved in various stages of the implementation process were recruited (N=30). Participants took part in interviews and focus groups. We used a hybrid inductive-deductive qualitative content analysis and a framework mapping approach to categorize findings into barriers, enablers, or neutral determinants aligned to NASSS framework domains. These determinants were also mapped to implementation stages using the Active Implementation Framework stages approach.
resultsParticipants comprised clinical adopters (14/30, 47%), organizational champions (5/30, 16%), and those with roles in organizational clinical informatics (5/30, 16%). Most determinants were mapped to the organization level, technology, and adopter subdomains. However, the study findings also demonstrated a relative lack of long-term implementation planning. Consequently, determinants were not uniformly distributed across the stages of implementation, with 61.1% (77/126) identified in the exploration stage, 30.9% (39/126) in the full implementation stage, and 4.7% (6/126) in the installation stages. Stakeholders engaged in more preimplementation and full-scale implementation activities, with fewer cycles of monitoring and iteration activities identified.
conclusionsThese findings addressed a substantial knowledge gap in the literature using systems thinking principles to identify the interdependent dynamics of CDSS implementation. A lack of sustained implementation strategies (ie, training and longer-term, adopter-level championing) weakened the sociotechnical network between developers and adopters, leading to communication barriers. More rigorous implementation planning, encompassing all 4 implementation stages, may, in a way, help in addressing the barriers identified and enhancing enablers.
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.