Computerised decision support systems in order communication for diagnostic, screening or monitoring test ordering: systematic reviews of the effects and cost-effectiveness of systems

Main, C; Moxham, T; Wyatt, JC; Kay, J; Anderson, R; Stein, K

doi:10.3310/hta14480

An error occurred retrieving publication content to display, please try again.

Page not found (404)

Sorry - the page you requested could not be found.

Please choose a page from the navigation or try a website search above to find the information you need.

Extended Research Article

Toolkit

View Award

Study showed that clinical decision support systems (CDSS) can have a statistically significant benefit on process or practitioner performance outcomes in certain contexts. However, there is insufficient evidence to determine whether CDSS in conjunction with order communication systems (OCS) versus OCS alone for diagnostic, screening or monitoring test ordering would be beneficial in the NHS context. The review demonstrates the need for further research in this area

C Main, T Moxham, JC Wyatt, J Kay, R Anderson & K Stein.

Detailed Author information
Detailed Author information

C Main ^1,^*, T Moxham ¹, JC Wyatt ², J Kay ³, R Anderson ¹, K Stein ¹

¹ Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), Exeter, UK
² Health Informatics Centre, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK
³ Oxford Radcliffe Hospitals Trust and City University, London, UK
^* Corresponding author Email: caroline.main@pms.ac.uk

Funding: {{metadata.Funding}}

{{metadata.Journal}} Volume: {{metadata.Volume}}, Issue: {{metadata.Issue}}, Published in {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'MMMM yyyy'}}

https://doi.org/{{metadata.DOI}}

Citation:{{author}}{{ (($index < metadata.AuthorsArray.length-1) && ($index <=6)) ? ', ' : '' }}{{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length <= 6) ? '.' : '' }} {{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length > 6) ? 'et al. ' : ''}}. {{metadata.JournalShortName}} {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'yyyy'}};{{metadata.Volume}}({{metadata.Issue}})

Report Content

Full Report
Abstract
Plain English Summary
Plain Language Summary
Scientific Summary

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

Responses to this report

No responses have been published.

If you would like to submit a response to this publication, please do so using the form below:

Comments submitted to the NIHR Journals Library are electronic letters to the editor. They enable our readers to debate issues raised in research reports published in the Journals Library. We aim to post within 14 working days all responses that contribute substantially to the topic investigated, as determined by the Editors. Non-relevant comments will be deleted.

Your name and affiliations will be published with your comment.

Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. The Editors may add, remove, or edit comments at their absolute discretion.

Enter response message*

Name (title, first name, last name)*

Occupation / Job title*

Affiliation / Employer*

Email*

Other authors
For example, if you are responding as a team or group. Please ensure you include full names and separate these using commas

Statement of competing interests
We believe that readers should be aware of any competing interests (conflicts of interest).
The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) define competing interests as including: financial relationships with industry (for example through employment, consultancies, stock, ownership, honoraria, and expert testimony), either directly or through immediate family; personal relationships; academic competition; and intellectual passion.

If yes, please provide details below

Enter response title*

Enter CAPTCHA What is one plus zero?*

By submitting your response, you are stating that you agree to the terms & conditions

An error has occurred in processing the XML document