ArticleSystematic reviews2025
Barriers and facilitators to the implementation and adoption of computerised clinical decision support systems: an umbrella review protocol.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Barriers and facilitators to the implementation and adoption of computerised clinical decision support systems: an overview of reviews.Systematic reviews · 2026Pooled it
- Patterns of CDSS adoption in primary care: a cluster analysis and predictive modelling study from a stepped wedge trial.Implementation science : IS · 2026Trial
- Literature reviews: typology and forensic applications.International journal of legal medicine · 2025Review
- Metabolomics in neonatal sepsis: A critical appraisal of current evidence.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe implementation of computerised clinical decision support systems has the potential to enhance healthcare by improving patient safety, practitioner performance, and patient outcomes. Notwithstanding the numerous advantages, the uptake of clinical decision support systems remains constrained, thereby impeding the full realisation of their potential. To ensure the effective and successful implementation of these systems, it is essential to identify and analyse the reasons for their low uptake and adoption. This protocol outlines an umbrella review, which will synthesise the findings of existing literature reviews to generate a comprehensive overview of the barriers and facilitators to the implementation and adoption of decision support systems across healthcare settings.
methodsThis umbrella review protocol was developed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines. Searches for eligible articles will be conducted in four electronic bibliographic databases, including PubMed/MEDLINE, IEEE Xplore, Scopus, and Web of Science. Obtained results will be independently screened by four reviewers based on pre-defined eligibility criteria. The risk of bias will be assessed for all eligible articles. Data on barriers and facilitators to the implementation and adoption of clinical decision support systems will be extracted, summarised, and further categorised into themes that aim to describe the originating environment or concept of the respective factor. The frequency of all identified barriers and facilitators within the group of included reviews will be determined in order to establish a prioritisation of the factors. DISCUSSION: This umbrella review protocol presents a methodology for the systematic synthesis of barriers and facilitators to the implementation and adoption of clinical decision support systems across healthcare settings. The umbrella review will enable the development of novel implementation and adoption strategies that reinforce the identified facilitators and circumvent barriers, thereby promoting the use-oriented evaluation and effective utilisation of clinical decision support systems. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42024507614.
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.