ArticlePLOS digital health2026
Factors associated with chronic pain clinical decision support use in primary care.
Article in PLOS digital health, 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
Abstract
Clinical Decision Support (CDS), despite its potential to enhance healthcare quality, faces persistently low use. Prior research, often relying on self-reported data, has largely overlooked how clinician characteristics, such as gender and years in practice, moderate CDS use. We examined the moderating role of primary care clinician (PCC) characteristics on the relationship between patient-encounter characteristics and CDS use. We analyzed electronic health record data from a pragmatic randomized controlled trial (October 2019-May 2022) involving 69 PCCs with access to a CDS for managing chronic non-cancer pain (OneSheet). Our primary outcome was OneSheet use at a patient-encounter, defined as access within three days before or after an encounter. Independent variables included encounters for new patients, patients with chronic pain diagnoses, patients prescribed long-term opioid therapy (LTOT), and previous PCC OneSheet use. Generalized linear models with interaction terms tested PCC gender and years in practice as moderators. PCCs used OneSheet in 959 of 145,511 encounters (0.7%). Use was less likely for encounters with new patients (-0.42 percentage points (pp); 95% confidence interval (CI) [-0.65, -0.19]) but more likely for encounters with chronic pain diagnoses (3.48 pp; 95% CI [2.62, 4.33]) and patients prescribed LTOT (4.70 pp; 95% CI [3.57, 5.84]). Prior OneSheet use did not predict future use (0.30 pp; 95% CI [-0.00, 0.06]). Relationships were strongest among female PCCs with over 16 years of practice. Optimizing CDS use requires prioritizing clinical relevance and considering the diverse characteristics of clinicians.
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.