ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2026
Measuring what matters- patient and clinician priorities for clinical decision support interactions: a modified Delphi study.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPatient-centered clinical decision support (PC CDS) is a spectrum of digital tools intended to support patient and clinician decision making. Patient-clinician interaction is key to PC CDS, and patient-clinician interaction measurement areas assess how PC CDS impacts the care process and experiences a patient has accessing and receiving healthcare. Identifying measures that assess if and how PC CDS influences outcomes is essential to measuring impact, but it is unclear what outcomes patients and physicians consider important. This study aimed to develop a prioritized list of measurement areas informed by patients and primary care physicians (PCPs) to inform considerations for measuring patient-clinician interaction for PC CDS.
methodsWe conducted a modified Delphi study to understand patients' and PCPs' perspectives on the importance of fifteen previously identified patient-clinician interaction measurement areas for PC CDS. We conducted a three-round process with nine patients and nine PCP participants: (1) rating importance of measurement areas, (2) online discussion of ratings, and (3) forced-choice ranking activity of measurement areas.
resultsPatients and PCPs generally agreed about the importance of communication quality and trust in clinicians, and the interconnectedness of these areas. They additionally agreed that the relative importance of measurement areas depends on context and described contextual factors such as care expectations and patient complexity. Patients and PCPs also agreed that satisfaction, decision regret and discharge preparedness are of lower importance for PC CDS measurement. However, patients and PCPs had differing views on the importance of measuring access to information, decision quality and self-management. Patients ranked access to information higher than PCPs, while PCPs ranked decision quality and self-management higher than patients.
conclusionsAssessments of PC CDS effectiveness should consider what outcomes are most important to CDS end-users. Measurement of PC CDS is limited by logistics and feasibility considerations, and researchers should examine the outcomes assessed in PC CDS studies and identify opportunities to assess measurement areas important to key stakeholders. The results of this activity highlight areas for future work, including the importance of understanding how measurement of these areas may be impacted by context (e.g. patient complexity, disease status).
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.