Skip to search boxSkip to navigationSkip to main content

AHRQ white paper: Use of clinical decision rules for point-of-care decision support

  • Mark Ebell(corresponding author)
*Corresponding author for this work
Scholary Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-review

Sustainable Development Goals

  • SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well

Abstract

Translation of research into clinical practice remains a barrier, with inconsistent adoption of effective treatments and useful tests. Clinical decision rules (CDRs) integrate information from several clinical or laboratory findings to provide quantitative estimates of risk for a diagnosis or clinical outcome. They are increasingly reported in the literature and have the potential to provide a bridge that helps translate findings from original research studies into clinical practice. Unlike formal aids for shared decision making, they are pragmatic solutions that provide discrete quantitative data to aid clinicians and patients in decision making. These quantitative data can help inform the informal episodes of shared decision making that frequently take place at the point of care. Methods used to develop CDRs include expert opinion, multivariate models, point scores, and classification and regression trees Desirable CDRs are valid (make accurate predictions of risk), relevant (have been shown to improve patient-oriented outcomes), are easy to use at the point of care, are acceptable (with good face validity and transparency of recommendations), and are situated in the clinical context. The latter means that the rule places patients in risk groups that are clinically useful (i.e., below the test threshold or above the treatment threshold) and does so in adequate numbers to make use of the CDR a worthwhile investment in time. CDRs meeting these criteria should be integrated with electronic health records, populating the point score or decision tree with individual patient data and performing calculations automatically to streamline decision making.

Publication Information

Output type

Scholary Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-review

Original language

English (US)

Pages from-to (Number of pages)

Pages 712-721 (10 pages)

Journal (Volume, Issue Number)

Medical Decision Making (Volume 30, Issue 6)

Publication milestones

  • Published - 11/2010

Publication status

Published - 11/2010

ISSN

0272-989X

Publication IDs

  • Scopus: 78650835438
  • PubMed: 21183758

Publication metrics

Metrics

SciVal
FWCI
1.64
SciVal
Author count
1
SciVal
citations
30
SciVal
Paper percentile
83
Fractional count
1
Fractional count
1
Fractional count
1
Fractional count
1
Scopus
citations

PlumX, opens in new tab

Captures
96
Citation count
37