Defining and measuring physicians’ responses to clinical reminders

Decision-support systems, and specifically rule-based clinical reminders, are becoming common in medical practice. Despite their potential to improve clinical outcomes, physicians do not always use information from these systems. Concepts from the cognitive engineering literature on users’ responses...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of biomedical informatics 2009-04, Vol.42 (2), p.317-326
Hauptverfasser: Vashitz, Geva, Meyer, Joachim, Parmet, Yisrael, Peleg, Roni, Goldfarb, Dan, Porath, Avi, Gilutz, Harel
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Decision-support systems, and specifically rule-based clinical reminders, are becoming common in medical practice. Despite their potential to improve clinical outcomes, physicians do not always use information from these systems. Concepts from the cognitive engineering literature on users’ responses to warning systems may help to define physicians’ responses to reminders. Based on this literature, we suggest an exhaustive set of possible responses to clinical reminders, consisting of four responses named “Compliance”, “Reliance”, “Spillover” and “Reactance”. We suggest statistical measures to estimate these responses and empirically demonstrate them on data from a large-scale clinical reminder system for secondary prevention of cardiovascular diseases. There was evidence for Compliance, probably since the physicians found the reminders informative, but not for Reliance, in line with the notion that Compliance and Reliance are two distinct types of trust in information from decision-support systems. Our research supports the notion that CDSS can promote closing the treatment gap and improve physicians’ adherence to guidelines.
ISSN:1532-0464
1532-0480
DOI:10.1016/j.jbi.2008.10.001