Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42281367›Full record

ReviewJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2026

The GUIDE-CDSS framework: a comprehensive framework to GUIDE and evaluate the implementation of Clinical Decision Support Systems in healthcare, based on an overview of reviews.

Esther R C Janssen, Jesper Knoop, Gianmatteo Farabolini, Nicoló Baldini, Thomas Hoogeboom, Maria Gabriella Ceravolo, Stefano Negrini, Carlotte Kiekens, PREPARE Project Group

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 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

9 authors.

Esther R C JanssenRadboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ Health, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, 5600HB, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-4631-696X
Jesper KnoopMusculoskeletal Rehabilitation Research Group, School of Allied Health, HAN University of Applied Sciences, Arnhem/Nijmegen, 6802 EE, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2464-9037
Gianmatteo FaraboliniDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Marche Polytechnic University, Ancona, 60121, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-4732-155X
Nicoló BaldiniDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Marche Polytechnic University, Ancona, 60121, Italy.ORCID 0009-0003-9890-4074
Thomas HoogeboomDepartment of Rehabilitation, Physiotherapy Sciences and Sport, Brain Center, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, 3508 GA, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-2103-419X
Maria Gabriella CeravoloDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Marche Polytechnic University, Ancona, 60121, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2694-4638
Stefano NegriniLaboratory of Evidence-Based Rehabilitation, IRCCS Galeazzi-Sant'Ambrogio Hospital, Milan, 20157, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-1878-2747
Carlotte KiekensLaboratory of Evidence-Based Rehabilitation, IRCCS Galeazzi-Sant'Ambrogio Hospital, Milan, 20157, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-8500-7751
PREPARE Project Group

Funding

European UnionEuropean Union or European Health and Digital Executive Agency 101080288European Union. UK participants in Horizon Europe Project PREPARE 10086219Health-Ricerca CorrentePREPARE HORIZON-HLTH-2022-TOOL-12-01UKRI 10086219
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesDespite the significant potential for Clinical Decision Support Systems (CDSSs) to improve care processes and health outcomes, several barriers hinder their widespread implementation in healthcare. While numerous systematic reviews have summarized potential barriers and facilitators for CDSS implementation, a comprehensive framework to guide and evaluate the implementation of CDSSs in healthcare is lacking. This overview of reviews, aims to establish a framework-GUIDE-CDSS-aimed at guiding and evaluating implementation of CDSSs in healthcare. MATERIALS AND

methodsAn overview of systematic and scoping reviews was conducted by searching 6 databases. Systematic reviews or scoping reviews that used qualitative research methods to described implementation determinants for CDSSs in the healthcare domain were included. The AMSTAR 2 tool was used to assess the methodological quality. Results were collated into the GUIDE-CDSS framework. This framework describes implementation determinants and elements within those determinants found to impact implementation of CDSSs in healthcare.

resultsTwenty-three reviews were included in the analysis. All reviews had at least 2 critical weaknesses, showing a limited methodological quality of included reviews. Eight determinants and 38 elements for implementation of CDSSs in healthcare and were described in the GUIDE-CDSS framework: perceived relevance, perceived effect, trustworthiness, ease of use, workflow, training and skills, resources, and implementation strategy. DISCUSSION AND

conclusionThis overview provides a comprehensive synthesis of the determinants influencing the implementation of CDSSs in healthcare, collated in the GUIDE-CDSS framework. The findings underscore that for successful CDSS development, implementation and evaluation is multifactorial. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: This study was registered in PROSPERO (No. CRD42024512455).

Indexed as

Decision Support Systems, ClinicalDelivery of Health CareHumansReview Literature as Topicartificial intelligencedecision support systemsimplementation scienceprecision medicineprediction algorithmsqualitative research

Identifiers

PMID42281367
PMCPMC13580735

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.