ArticleBMJ open2025
Digitalisation of the guideline registry of the Association of Scientific Medical Societies in Germany for an open, guideline-based, trustworthy evidence ecosystem (Dissolve-E): a protocol of a before-after study with different user groups.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Benchmarking large language models for question answering on German clinical practice guidelines.BMJ health & care informatics · 2026Article
- The Institutional Black Box of Friction Between Digital Agility Demands and Clinical Bureaucracy in Hospital Social Media Management.F1000Research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionInternationally, the vision of a 'Digital Trustworthy Evidence Ecosystem' is being pursued with clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) as one element of such a system. Consequently, CPGs and CPG repositories need to be digitalised. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The objective of this prospective, before-after study is to evaluate the impact of digitalising a quality-assured CPG registry using the international data format standard 'Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources' (FHIR). This includes the architecture of the registry, the format of individual guidelines and application programming interfaces to import and export CPG content. The study is guided by a scoping review.The primary outcome is the usability of the digitalised CPG registry and CPG content for different user groups comprising CPG developers, CPG administrators, health care professionals and patients-including at the point of care in in- and outpatient settings-and technical professionals as users of CPG content in digital applications.For the before-after comparison, semi-quantitative (surveys) and qualitative (focus groups) methods are applied. All user groups will be involved in a baseline analysis to assess user expectations and technical requirements. According to the results, the digitalised guideline registry will be implemented. The intervention comprises the testing of the digitalised registry with guideline content by all user groups. Analysis of outcomes will include formative and summative evaluation. Final results and further research needs will be discussed in a World Café with all stakeholders. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Ethics Committee of the Berlin chamber of physicians, in accordance with its code of conduct §15 section 1 (Eth-KB-24-11) confirmed that no ethical approval is needed for this study. The study is registered in the German Clinical Trials Registry (No: DRKS00034111). Results will be presented at national and international conferences, published in peer-reviewed journals and on the website of the funding institution. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: German Clinical Trials Registry (No: DRKS00034111).
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.