The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The use and effectiveness of electronic clinical decision support tools in the ambulatory/primary care setting: a systematic review of the literature
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: The 1999 Institute of Medicine (IOM) report To Err is Human alerted the healthcare industry and the public to the lack of consistency in the delivery of quality care to the US population. Clinical decision support systems (CDSS) have become a leading response to this report, and to the growing demand for the promotion of standards-based care delivery. The objective of this paper is to evaluate the recent literature for both the types and effectiveness of electronic CDSS in the primary care setting. METHODS: An electronic search of the literature was conducted utilising MEDLINE (1996-2006), CINAHL (1982-2006) and all EBM Reviews--Cochrane DSR, ACP Journal Club, DARE and CCTR. The search included various combinations of the MeSH search terms 'clinical decision support systems', 'primary health care', 'ambulatory care' and 'practice guidelines' and was limited to articles published from 2000 to 2006. Studies were selected for review if they involved either non-randomised observational or randomised controlled trials (RCTs) utilising CDSS as a single intervention, were performed in an ambulatory primary care setting and included quantifiable outcome measures. RESULTS: Seventeen studies were included in the review, including five non-randomised observational studies and 12 RCTs. Thirteen studies (76%) found either positive or variable outcomes related to CDSS intervention with four studies (24%) showing no significant effect. CONCLUSION: Although there is validation that CDSS has the potential to produce statistically significant improvement in outcomes, there is much variability among the types and methods of CDSS implementation and resulting effectiveness. As CDSS will likely continue to be at the forefront of the march toward effective standards-based care, more work needs to be done to determine effective implementation strategies for the use of CDSS across multiple settings and patient populations.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The quality of health care delivered to adults in the United States
McGlynn, E. A., Asch, S. M., Adams, J., Keesey, J., Hicks, J., DeCristofaro, A., & Kerr, E. A. (2003) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa022615 · Cited by 5,079
Improving Preventive Care by Prompting Physicians
Balas, E. A. (2000) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinte.160.3.301 · Cited by 385
Cited by
The Impact of eHealth on the Quality and Safety of Health Care: A Systematic Overview
Black, A. D., Car, J., Pagliari, C., Anandan, C., Cresswell, K., Bokun, T., McKinstry, B., Procter, R., Majeed, A., & Sheikh, A. (2011) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000387 · Cited by 1,442
Effect of Clinical Decision-Support Systems: A Systematic Review
Bright, T. J., Wong, A., Dhurjati, R., Bristow, E., Bastian, L., Coeytaux, R. R., Samsa, G., Hasselblad, V., Williams, J. W., Musty, M. D., et al. (2012) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-157-1-201207030-00450 · Cited by 1,200
Johnson, M. J., & May, C. R. (2015) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008592 · Cited by 513
Clinical Benefits of Electronic Health Record Use: National Findings
King, J., Patel, V., Jamoom, E. W., & Furukawa, M. F. (2014) · Health Services Research · doi:10.1111/1475-6773.12135 · Cited by 273
The Future Of Health Information Technology In The Patient-Centered Medical Home
Bates, D. W., & Bitton, A. (2010) · Health Affairs · doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2010.0007 · Cited by 257
Metadata
- Authors
- Bryan, C., & Boren, S.
- Venue
- Journal of Innovation in Health Informatics
- Publisher
- Portico
- Published
- 2008-07-01
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 79-91
- ISSN
- 1475-9985 (ISSN-L)
- 2058-4555
- OpenAlex
- W2188171963
- Cited by
- 170
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 1.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The use and effectiveness of electronic clinical decision support tools in the ambulatory/primary care setting: a systematic review of the literature. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.14236/jhi.v16i2.679
- The paper
- Bryan, C., & Boren, S. (2008). The use and effectiveness of electronic clinical decision support tools in the ambulatory/primary care setting: a systematic review of the literature. Journal of Innovation in Health Informatics. https://doi.org/10.14236/jhi.v16i2.679
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.