Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41888144›Full record

ArticleNPJ primary care respiratory medicine2026

Asthma clinical decision support systems in primary care: an updated scoping review of implementation.

Holly Tibble, Bohee Lee, Imogen Skene

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in NPJ primary care respiratory medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Holly TibbleUsher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK. htibble@ed.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-7169-4087
Bohee LeeNational Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9671-386X
Imogen SkeneBarts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5215-2899

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite advances in digital health technologies, the integration of clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) into routine primary care for asthma has been extremely limited. Asthma CDSSs employ diverse approaches, from prescribing support to risk prediction, but it remains unclear which are most likely to achieve sustained, real-world impact. Our objectives were to determine the mechanisms of action, clinical practice integration approaches, outputs and outcomes of asthma CDSSs in recent literature. Five electronic databases (Embase via Ovid, PubMed, CENTRAL, the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Database, and the ISRCTN registry of clinical trials) were searched to identify papers published between 2012 and 2024 describing pilot studies, feasibility studies, or clinical trials, of primary care-based asthma CDSS. Two independent reviewers screened the retrieved literature and extracted the data on study designs, interventions, outcomes and mechanisms of action, and results. Across 18 included trials, interventions demonstrated substantial heterogeneity in mechanisms, integration methods, and targeted clinical behaviours. Although some studies showed improvements in adherence to prescribing best practices and the delivery of personalised action plans, most reported modest or declining system use over time and inconsistent effects on asthma control or severe attack outcomes. Continued progress will depend on integrating behavioural theory, improving workflow compatibility, and generating rigorous evidence to guide the development of CDSSs with genuine potential for sustainable impact.

Indexed as

AsthmaDecision Support Systems, ClinicalPrimary Health CareDigital HealthHumans

Identifiers

PMID41888144
PMCPMC13187283

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.