ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2026
Designing a computerized decision support system for asthma chronic disease management in community pharmacies.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWe previously built and validated the Electronic Asthma Management System (eAMS)-a clinic-based asthma computerized clinical decision support system (CDSS) which is in clinical use.
aimHerein, we sought to adapt and optimize the eAMS for implementation in community pharmacy practice.
methodWe iteratively developed a system prototype (the eAMS-Pharm) with input from clinical pharmacists, and asthma, knowledge translation, and eHealth experts. After face-validation by three external community pharmacists, we used a rapid-cycle development process for optimization of system design (format), content, and user workflows (usability). This involved a sequential and repeated three-stage process: (1) system prototype demonstration and testing in 90 min, semi-structured virtual focus groups with target end-users; (2) analysis of focus group findings; and (3) corresponding modifications to the prototype, then re-testing in another focus group. This process continued until we reached pre-defined stopping criteria. We used a questionnaire to gather demographic information and further usability data and feedback. Community pharmacy team members were recruited from an existing pharmacy database.
resultsStopping criteria were met after six focus group cycles with 28 participants [23 (83%) pharmacists, 4 (14%) registered pharmacy technicians/assistants, and 1 (3%) pharmacy student]. User feedback and corresponding system improvements spanned usability, workflow, and prescriber communication domains. The optimized system consisted of a pharmacy portal with a patient dashboard, patient and provider versions of a point-of-care questionnaire, an interactive CDSS producing guideline-based recommendations, automated documentation, and pre-formatted prescriber communications. The System Usability Scale score was 82.9 ± 16.8 (maximum 100), and user responses to Likert scale-based assessments of eAMS-Pharm design, content, workflow, impact, and overall impressions were highly favorable.
conclusionWe built and optimized a chronic disease CDSS for use in community pharmacies, identifying and addressing pharmacy-specific barriers to implementation. The system achieved a high system usability score and highly favorable ratings for perceived system benefits, likelihood of clinical use, and patient benefits. The eAMS-Pharm can now be evaluated for uptake, care impact, and outcome impact in real-world settings. Our findings surrounding users' design, content, and usability/workflow preferences, and our unique development strategy, can also inform future pharmacy-based chronic disease CDSS design.
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.