Cargando…
Formative evaluation of the accuracy of a clinical decision support system for cervical cancer screening
OBJECTIVES: We previously developed and reported on a prototype clinical decision support system (CDSS) for cervical cancer screening. However, the system is complex as it is based on multiple guidelines and free-text processing. Therefore, the system is susceptible to failures. This report describe...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3721177/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23564631 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/amiajnl-2013-001613 |
_version_ | 1782278043857846272 |
---|---|
author | Wagholikar, Kavishwar Balwant MacLaughlin, Kathy L Kastner, Thomas M Casey, Petra M Henry, Michael Greenes, Robert A Liu, Hongfang Chaudhry, Rajeev |
author_facet | Wagholikar, Kavishwar Balwant MacLaughlin, Kathy L Kastner, Thomas M Casey, Petra M Henry, Michael Greenes, Robert A Liu, Hongfang Chaudhry, Rajeev |
author_sort | Wagholikar, Kavishwar Balwant |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: We previously developed and reported on a prototype clinical decision support system (CDSS) for cervical cancer screening. However, the system is complex as it is based on multiple guidelines and free-text processing. Therefore, the system is susceptible to failures. This report describes a formative evaluation of the system, which is a necessary step to ensure deployment readiness of the system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Care providers who are potential end-users of the CDSS were invited to provide their recommendations for a random set of patients that represented diverse decision scenarios. The recommendations of the care providers and those generated by the CDSS were compared. Mismatched recommendations were reviewed by two independent experts. RESULTS: A total of 25 users participated in this study and provided recommendations for 175 cases. The CDSS had an accuracy of 87% and 12 types of CDSS errors were identified, which were mainly due to deficiencies in the system's guideline rules. When the deficiencies were rectified, the CDSS generated optimal recommendations for all failure cases, except one with incomplete documentation. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The crowd-sourcing approach for construction of the reference set, coupled with the expert review of mismatched recommendations, facilitated an effective evaluation and enhancement of the system, by identifying decision scenarios that were missed by the system's developers. The described methodology will be useful for other researchers who seek rapidly to evaluate and enhance the deployment readiness of complex decision support systems. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3721177 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-37211772013-12-11 Formative evaluation of the accuracy of a clinical decision support system for cervical cancer screening Wagholikar, Kavishwar Balwant MacLaughlin, Kathy L Kastner, Thomas M Casey, Petra M Henry, Michael Greenes, Robert A Liu, Hongfang Chaudhry, Rajeev J Am Med Inform Assoc Focus on Human Factors and System Utilization OBJECTIVES: We previously developed and reported on a prototype clinical decision support system (CDSS) for cervical cancer screening. However, the system is complex as it is based on multiple guidelines and free-text processing. Therefore, the system is susceptible to failures. This report describes a formative evaluation of the system, which is a necessary step to ensure deployment readiness of the system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Care providers who are potential end-users of the CDSS were invited to provide their recommendations for a random set of patients that represented diverse decision scenarios. The recommendations of the care providers and those generated by the CDSS were compared. Mismatched recommendations were reviewed by two independent experts. RESULTS: A total of 25 users participated in this study and provided recommendations for 175 cases. The CDSS had an accuracy of 87% and 12 types of CDSS errors were identified, which were mainly due to deficiencies in the system's guideline rules. When the deficiencies were rectified, the CDSS generated optimal recommendations for all failure cases, except one with incomplete documentation. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The crowd-sourcing approach for construction of the reference set, coupled with the expert review of mismatched recommendations, facilitated an effective evaluation and enhancement of the system, by identifying decision scenarios that were missed by the system's developers. The described methodology will be useful for other researchers who seek rapidly to evaluate and enhance the deployment readiness of complex decision support systems. BMJ Publishing Group 2013-07 2013-04-05 /pmc/articles/PMC3721177/ /pubmed/23564631 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/amiajnl-2013-001613 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 3.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ |
spellingShingle | Focus on Human Factors and System Utilization Wagholikar, Kavishwar Balwant MacLaughlin, Kathy L Kastner, Thomas M Casey, Petra M Henry, Michael Greenes, Robert A Liu, Hongfang Chaudhry, Rajeev Formative evaluation of the accuracy of a clinical decision support system for cervical cancer screening |
title | Formative evaluation of the accuracy of a clinical decision support system for cervical cancer screening |
title_full | Formative evaluation of the accuracy of a clinical decision support system for cervical cancer screening |
title_fullStr | Formative evaluation of the accuracy of a clinical decision support system for cervical cancer screening |
title_full_unstemmed | Formative evaluation of the accuracy of a clinical decision support system for cervical cancer screening |
title_short | Formative evaluation of the accuracy of a clinical decision support system for cervical cancer screening |
title_sort | formative evaluation of the accuracy of a clinical decision support system for cervical cancer screening |
topic | Focus on Human Factors and System Utilization |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3721177/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23564631 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/amiajnl-2013-001613 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT wagholikarkavishwarbalwant formativeevaluationoftheaccuracyofaclinicaldecisionsupportsystemforcervicalcancerscreening AT maclaughlinkathyl formativeevaluationoftheaccuracyofaclinicaldecisionsupportsystemforcervicalcancerscreening AT kastnerthomasm formativeevaluationoftheaccuracyofaclinicaldecisionsupportsystemforcervicalcancerscreening AT caseypetram formativeevaluationoftheaccuracyofaclinicaldecisionsupportsystemforcervicalcancerscreening AT henrymichael formativeevaluationoftheaccuracyofaclinicaldecisionsupportsystemforcervicalcancerscreening AT greenesroberta formativeevaluationoftheaccuracyofaclinicaldecisionsupportsystemforcervicalcancerscreening AT liuhongfang formativeevaluationoftheaccuracyofaclinicaldecisionsupportsystemforcervicalcancerscreening AT chaudhryrajeev formativeevaluationoftheaccuracyofaclinicaldecisionsupportsystemforcervicalcancerscreening |