↓ Skip to main content

The GUIDES checklist: development of a tool to improve the successful use of guideline-based computerised clinical decision support

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
43 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
81 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
172 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The GUIDES checklist: development of a tool to improve the successful use of guideline-based computerised clinical decision support
Published in
Implementation Science, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13012-018-0772-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stijn Van de Velde, Ilkka Kunnamo, Pavel Roshanov, Tiina Kortteisto, Bert Aertgeerts, Per Olav Vandvik, Signe Flottorp, GUIDES expert panel

Abstract

Computerised decision support (CDS) based on trustworthy clinical guidelines is a key component of a learning healthcare system. Research shows that the effectiveness of CDS is mixed. Multifaceted context, system, recommendation and implementation factors may potentially affect the success of CDS interventions. This paper describes the development of a checklist that is intended to support professionals to implement CDS successfully. We developed the checklist through an iterative process that involved a systematic review of evidence and frameworks, a synthesis of the success factors identified in the review, feedback from an international expert panel that evaluated the checklist in relation to a list of desirable framework attributes, consultations with patients and healthcare consumers and pilot testing of the checklist. We screened 5347 papers and selected 71 papers with relevant information on success factors for guideline-based CDS. From the selected papers, we developed a 16-factor checklist that is divided in four domains, i.e. the CDS context, content, system and implementation domains. The panel of experts evaluated the checklist positively as an instrument that could support people implementing guideline-based CDS across a wide range of settings globally. Patients and healthcare consumers identified guideline-based CDS as an important quality improvement intervention and perceived the GUIDES checklist as a suitable and useful strategy. The GUIDES checklist can support professionals in considering the factors that affect the success of CDS interventions. It may facilitate a deeper and more accurate understanding of the factors shaping CDS effectiveness. Relying on a structured approach may prevent that important factors are missed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 43 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 172 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 172 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 28 16%
Student > Master 25 15%
Other 15 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 5%
Other 33 19%
Unknown 47 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 48 28%
Computer Science 18 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 10%
Psychology 5 3%
Engineering 5 3%
Other 19 11%
Unknown 60 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 31. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 August 2023.
All research outputs
#1,235,041
of 24,762,960 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#216
of 1,779 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,694
of 334,862 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#9
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,762,960 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,779 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 334,862 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.