Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40989663›Full record

ArticleAntimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE2025

Computerized decision support for antimicrobial prescribing: what every antibiotic steward should know.

Davide Bosetti, Rebecca Grant, Gaud Catho

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Davide BosettiInfection Control Programme and WHO Collaborating Centre for Infection Prevention and Control and Antimicrobial Resistance, Geneva University Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6138-5536
Rebecca GrantInfection Control Programme and WHO Collaborating Centre for Infection Prevention and Control and Antimicrobial Resistance, Geneva University Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8412-8113
Gaud CathoInfection Control Programme and WHO Collaborating Centre for Infection Prevention and Control and Antimicrobial Resistance, Geneva University Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4948-0944

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To examine the potential role of computerized clinical decision support systems (CDSS) in antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) and to identify significant challenges concerning their effectiveness and implementation. Design: Narrative review. Setting and methods: This review is based on existing literature regarding CDSS in AMS across various healthcare environments, such as hospitals and primary care facilities. The systems evaluated include both stand-alone tools and those integrated into electronic health records (EHR), featuring expert rule-based logic and new machine learning (ML) models. CDSS capabilities include prescribing guidance, alerts, resistance prediction, and de-escalation protocols. Results: CDSS are intended to aid in antimicrobial prescribing by integrating clinical guidelines with data specific to each patient. Despite their theoretical potential, their effectiveness is often hindered by inconsistent incorporation into clinical practices, low user engagement, and inadequate design. Many systems are reactive, not well-suited to user needs, or lack transparency in their recommendations. Evaluating these systems is challenging due to varied outcomes, poor methodological quality of studies, and the complexity of attributing causality in intricate care settings. Barriers to implementation include alert fatigue, perceived time constraints, poor fit with existing workflows, and resistance to change. Instances like the COMPASS trial demonstrate the disconnect between design and practical application, underscoring the necessity for user-focused development, clear reasoning, and a balanced approach between mandatory and advisory elements. Conclusions: CDSS have the potential to improve antimicrobial use, but widespread impact is hindered by evaluation and implementation challenges. Realizing their value requires better integration, usability, and rigorous research frameworks tailored to complex healthcare settings.

Identifiers

PMID40989663
PMCPMC12451809

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.