ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2026
Evaluation of Provider Clinical Decision Support System Adoption Rates by Patient Race and Sex.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundClinical decision support (CDS) systems can improve care quality, but their implications for equity remain uncertain. We examined whether provider response to CDS alerts differed by patient race and sex in primary care, and whether differences in alert exposure helped explain any observed variation. METHODS AND PRINCIPAL
findingsWe conducted a retrospective study using EHR data from a New York City academic health system, focusing on alert-based CDS during outpatient primary care. Logistic regression was used to estimate the likelihood of alert engagement by patient race and sex, while adjusting for encounter and provider factors. We used a generalized structural equation model to assess mediation by alert type, decomposing direct and indirect effects of demographics on response.Direct effects suggest that providers may respond differently to alerts based on patient identity, consistent with interpersonal bias, in which implicit or explicit attitudes shape clinical behavior, and on the context of the visit. Indirect effects highlight disparities in how alerts are assigned across groups, indicating that algorithmic or systemic bias may be embedded within the technology itself. Estimated mediated pathways suggest that even when providers respond uniformly to alerts, unequal exposure can still produce inequitable outcomes. DISCUSSION: The findings highlight that the type of CDS triggered plays a significant role in differential CDS responses, with provider- and patient-related factors evident in these differences. These findings underscore the need to evaluate not only provider behavior but also the logic and distribution of CDS tools themselves, as both can contribute to disparities in care delivery. Further research should also focus on looking for the potential health impact of the differential response.
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.