ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2025
Problems and Barriers Related to the Use of AI-Based Clinical Decision Support Systems: Interview Study.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Role of Artificial Intelligence in Cleft Lip and/or Cleft Palate in Diagnosis and Detection-An Umbrella Review.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2026Pooled it
- Caregiver Preferences for AI-Supported Telemedicine in Pediatric Palliative Care: A Discrete Choice Experiment.Journal of palliative care · 2026Article
- Patients' Perspectives on Applications of AI and Personalized Medicine in Life-Threatening Heart Disease: European Cross-Sectional Patient Questionnaire Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Evaluation of ChatGPT-5 for CT Imaging in Canadian CT Head Rule-Positive Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: A Pilot Study.Biomedicines · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Patient-Centered Care and Macro-, Meso-, and Micro-Level Determinants of Rehumanization and Dehumanization: Qualitative Interview Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Development and prospective shadow evaluation of a domain-specific large language model for emergency neurological diagnosis.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Risk prediction in spine surgery: a scoping review of traditional models, artificial intelligence, and the challenge of clinical translation.Spine deformity · 2026Review
- Guidance for Use of Artificial Intelligence in Community Pharmacy Practice: Perspectives and Needs of Pharmacists in Ontario, Canada.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Patient Benefits in the Context of Sepsis-Related AI-Based Clinical Decision Support Systems: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Feasibility and acceptability of Nenne Navi-AI: family-tailored intervention to improve sleep in young Japanese children.Frontiers in sleep · 2026Article
- Authentic content as an effective mechanism for embedding patient voices in health innovation: a hypothesis and conceptual framework.Frontiers in health services · 2026Article
- How Implementation Context Shapes Clinician Acceptance and Engagement with Guideline-Based Clinical Decision Support Systems in Primary Care: A Qualitative Study.Journal of healthcare leadership · 2026Article
- Beyond morphology: imaging the glioblastoma microenvironment in the era of quantitative neuro-oncology.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence guidance in ethically challenging clinical scenarios in child and adolescent psychiatry: a qualitative study in the context of Turkiye.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- Healthcare Decision-Making Ecosystem Deengineering.Cureus · 2025Review
- Lightweight Deep Learning Models with Explainable AI for Early Alzheimer's Detection from Standard MRI Scans.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Facilitators, barriers, and insights using an HFA-PEFF-based clinical decision support system: A proof-of-concept study.ESC heart failure · 2025Article
- Pediatrics 4.0: the Transformative Impacts of the Latest Industrial Revolution on Pediatrics.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2025Article
- Improving AI-Based Clinical Decision Support Systems and Their Integration Into Care From the Perspective of Experts: Interview Study Among Different Stakeholders.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Article
- Current Bioinformatics Tools in Precision Oncology.MedComm · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDigitalization is currently revolutionizing health care worldwide. A promising technology in this context is artificial intelligence (AI). The application of AI can support health care providers in their daily work in various ways. The integration of AI is particularly promising in clinical decision support systems (CDSSs). While the opportunities of this technology are numerous, the problems should not be overlooked.
objectiveThis study aimed to identify challenges and barriers in the context of AI-based CDSSs from the perspectives of experts across various disciplines.
methodsSemistructured expert interviews were conducted with different stakeholders. These included representatives of patients, physicians and caregivers, developers of AI-based CDSSs, researchers (studying AI in health care and social and health law), quality management and quality assurance representatives, a representative of an ethics committee, a representative of a health insurance fund, and medical product consultants. The interviews took place on the web and were recorded, transcribed, and subsequently subjected to a qualitative content analysis based on the method by Kuckartz. The analysis was conducted using MAXQDA software. Initially, the problems were separated into "general," "development," and "clinical use." Finally, a workshop within the project consortium served to systematize the identified problems.
resultsA total of 15 expert interviews were conducted, and 309 expert statements with reference to problems and barriers in the context of AI-based CDSSs were identified. These emerged in 7 problem categories: technology (46/309, 14.9%), data (59/309, 19.1%), user (102/309, 33%), studies (17/309, 5.5%), ethics (20/309, 6.5%), law (33/309, 10.7%), and general (32/309, 10.4%). The problem categories were further divided into problem areas, which in turn comprised the respective problems.
conclusionsA large number of problems and barriers were identified in the context of AI-based CDSSs. These can be systematized according to the point at which they occur ("general," "development," and "clinical use") or according to the problem category ("technology," "data," "user," "studies," "ethics," "law," and "general"). The problems identified in this work should be further investigated. They can be used as a basis for deriving solutions to optimize development, acceptance, and use of AI-based CDSSs. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/preprints.62704.
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.