基于数据的临床推荐在日常实践中的信任和可接受性:范围综述。

Trust and acceptability of data-driven clinical recommendations in everyday practice: A scoping review.

机构信息

University of Leeds, Woodhouse Lane, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK.

Bradford District Care Trust, Bradford, New Mill, Victoria Rd, BD18 3LD, UK.

出版信息

Int J Med Inform. 2024 Mar;183:105342. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2024.105342. Epub 2024 Jan 20.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Increasing attention is being given to the analysis of large health datasets to derive new clinical decision support systems (CDSS). However, few data-driven CDSS are being adopted into clinical practice. Trust in these tools is believed to be fundamental for acceptance and uptake but to date little attention has been given to defining or evaluating trust in clinical settings.

OBJECTIVES

A scoping review was conducted to explore how and where acceptability and trustworthiness of data-driven CDSS have been assessed from the health professional's perspective.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, Web of Science, Scopus, ACM Digital, IEEE Xplore and Google Scholar were searched in March 2022 using terms expanded from: "data-driven" AND "clinical decision support" AND "acceptability". Included studies focused on healthcare practitioner-facing data-driven CDSS, relating directly to clinical care. They included trust or a proxy as an outcome, or in the discussion. The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) is followed in the reporting of this review.

RESULTS

3291 papers were screened, with 85 primary research studies eligible for inclusion. Studies covered a diverse range of clinical specialisms and intended contexts, but hypothetical systems (24) outnumbered those in clinical use (18). Twenty-five studies measured trust, via a wide variety of quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods. A further 24 discussed themes of trust without it being explicitly evaluated, and from these, themes of transparency, explainability, and supporting evidence were identified as factors influencing healthcare practitioner trust in data-driven CDSS.

CONCLUSION

There is a growing body of research on data-driven CDSS, but few studies have explored stakeholder perceptions in depth, with limited focused research on trustworthiness. Further research on healthcare practitioner acceptance, including requirements for transparency and explainability, should inform clinical implementation.

摘要

背景

越来越多的人开始关注分析大型健康数据集,以开发新的临床决策支持系统 (CDSS)。然而,很少有数据驱动的 CDSS 被应用于临床实践。人们认为,对这些工具的信任是接受和采用的基础,但迄今为止,很少有人关注在临床环境中定义或评估信任。

目的

本研究通过范围综述,探讨从卫生专业人员的角度评估数据驱动的 CDSS 的可接受性和可信度的方法和地点。

方法

2022 年 3 月,使用从“数据驱动”和“临床决策支持”和“可接受性”扩展的术语,在 Medline、Embase、PsycInfo、Web of Science、Scopus、ACM Digital、IEEE Xplore 和 Google Scholar 中进行了搜索。纳入的研究侧重于面向医疗保健从业者的数据驱动的 CDSS,与临床护理直接相关。它们包括信任或代理作为结果,或在讨论中。本综述遵循系统评价和荟萃分析扩展的首选报告项目 (PRISMA-ScR) 进行报告。

结果

筛选出 3291 篇论文,其中 85 篇主要研究符合纳入标准。研究涵盖了广泛的临床专业和预期的背景,但假设系统 (24 项) 多于临床应用系统 (18 项)。25 项研究通过各种定量、定性和混合方法测量了信任。另有 24 项研究讨论了信任主题,但没有明确评估,从中确定了透明度、可解释性和支持证据作为影响医疗保健从业者对数据驱动的 CDSS 的信任的因素。

结论

虽然关于数据驱动的 CDSS 的研究越来越多,但很少有研究深入探讨利益相关者的看法,对可信度的研究也很有限。进一步研究医疗保健从业者的接受程度,包括对透明度和可解释性的要求,将为临床实施提供信息。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索