Comparative outcome studies of clinical decision support software: limitations to the practice of evidence-based system acquisition

Gaurav J ay Dhiman, Kyle T. Amber, Kenneth Goodman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Scopus citations

Abstract

Clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) assist clinicians with patient diagnosis and treatment. However, inadequate attention has been paid to the process of selecting and buying systems. The diversity of CDSSs, coupled with research obstacles, marketplace limitations, and legal impediments, has thwarted comparative outcome studies and reduced the availability of reliable information and advice for purchasers. We review these limitations and recommend several comparative studies, which were conducted in phases; studies conducted in phases and focused on limited outcomes of safety, efficacy, and implementation in varied clinical settings. Additionally, we recommend the increased availability of guidance tools to assist purchasers with evidence-based purchases. Transparency is necessary in purchasers' reporting of system defects and vendors' disclosure of marketing conflicts of interest to support methodologically sound studies. Taken together, these measures can foster the evolution of evidence-based tools that, in turn, will enable and empower system purchasers to make wise choices and improve the care of patients.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)e13-e20
JournalJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association
Volume22
Issue numbere1
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 2015

Keywords

  • clinical decision support systems
  • comparative study
  • marketing
  • medical economics
  • medical ethics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Comparative outcome studies of clinical decision support software: limitations to the practice of evidence-based system acquisition'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this