Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 28, 2026

Author Spotlight: Developing a Point-of-Care Hemoglobin Estimation Method for Anemia Management
Published on: January 19, 2024
Adaptive design of a clinical decision support tool: What the impact on utilization rates means for future CDS
Devin Mann1, Rachel Hess2, Thomas McGinn3
1Department of Population Health, New York University School of Medicine, United States of America.
Objective:
We employed an agile, user-centered approach to the design of a clinical decision support tool in our prior integrated clinical prediction rule study, which achieved high adoption rates. To understand if applying this user-centered process to adapt clinical decision support tools is effective in improving the use of clinical prediction rules, we examined utilization rates of a clinical decision support tool adapted from the original integrated clinical prediction rule study tool to determine if applying this user-centered process to design yields enhanced utilization rates similar to the integrated clinical prediction rule study.MATERIALS & METHODS: We conducted pre-deployment usability testing and semi-structured group interviews at 6 months post-deployment with 75 providers at 14 intervention clinics across the two sites to collect user feedback. Qualitative data analysis is bifurcated into immediate and delayed stages; we reported on immediate-stage findings from real-time field notes used to generate a set of rapid, pragmatic recommendations for iterative refinement. Monthly utilization rates were calculated and examined over 12 months.
Results:
We hypothesized a well-validated, user-centered clinical decision support tool would lead to relatively high adoption rates. Then 6 months post-deployment, integrated clinical prediction rule study tool utilization rates were substantially lower than anticipated based on the original integrated clinical prediction rule study trial (68%) at 17% (Health System A) and 5% (Health System B). User feedback at 6 months resulted in recommendations for tool refinement, which were incorporated when possible into tool design; however, utilization rates at 12 months post-deployment remained low at 14% and 4% respectively.
Discussion:
Although valuable, findings demonstrate the limitations of a user-centered approach given the complexity of clinical decision support.
Conclusion:
Strategies for addressing persistent external factors impacting clinical decision support adoption should be considered in addition to the user-centered design and implementation of clinical decision support.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Self-Help Support Groups
Accessibility and Cost-Effectiveness
One of the primary strengths of self-help...
Decision Making
Automatic decision-making is fast, intuitive, and relies on gut feelings...
Impact of Groups on Groups
Factorial Design
Measuring Reaction Rates
Group Design

