ArticleJAMIA open2026
Understanding end-user contexts and identifying design preferences of an artificial intelligence-based clinical decision support tool for early autism detection.
Article in JAMIA open, 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
Objectives: Building on innovations for autism detection-where artificial intelligence (AI)-based models monitor clinical data within electronic health records-this study evaluates the context for clinical decision support (CDS) deployment and identifies design preferences. Materials and Methods: This observational study utilized contextual inquiry to elicit perspectives from 8 clinicians and twenty caregivers during 18- to 24-month well-child visits at Duke-affiliated clinics. Data were analyzed using rapid qualitative analysis techniques. Results: Workflow analysis identified 6 user tasks, 3 technology-user interactions, and 5 clinical decision points. Technologies that streamlined screening included patient portals, digital tablets, and note templates. Clinicians identified 2 major barriers-limited screening tool accuracy and challenges in implementing follow-up steps-and 3 facilitators: electronic screening, early intervention provider input, and staff referral coordination support. For design, CDS should include clear, actionable outputs, with explanations of prediction data, visual summaries linked to next steps, and educational resources. Embedding CDS within the EHR, with outputs delivered at key points during the clinical encounter, along with caregiver-facing materials, would improve workflow efficiency. Discussion: Findings highlight key integration points for an autism detection AI-based CDS tool and stress the need for clinical utility and caregiver-centered communication. Effective design requires alignment with clinical workflow, including the timing of outputs, meaningful explanations, and integration with caregiver communication. Conclusion: Findings will inform the design of an AI-based CDS tool for autism detection, providing workflow-informed integration points and user preferences. Future work should refine explainability and optimize delivery of outputs within clinical encounters to support decision-making and caregiver engagement.
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.