Table 3 Multivariable meta-regression model for CDSS uptake, controlling for uptake type (n = 58)
CDSS features | Estimate (95% CI) | p value |
|---|---|---|
Uptake type | ||
 Clinician | Ref |  |
 Patient | − 1.09 (− 2.63, 0.45) | 0.17 |
 Event | − 0.85 (− 3.70, 0.01) | 0.34 |
Feature 4: Has the availability and quality of the patient data needed to inform the CDSS been formally evaluated? | ||
 No (37/58) | Ref |  |
 Yes (21/58) | 1.21 (0.24, 2.19) | 0.02 |
Feature 35: Were other barriers to the behaviour changes being targeted by the CDSS discussed (i.e. medication costs), and if so were strategies implemented to address those barriers? | ||
 No (51/58) | Ref |  |
 Yes (7/58) | 1.64 (0.22, 3.07) | 0.02 |
Feature 15: Was the CDSS pilot tested and was the accuracy of information specifically assessed? | ||
 No (40/58) | Ref |  |
 Yes (20/58) | − 0.96 (− 1.98, 0.05) | 0.06 |
Feature 7: Was specific additional hardware (other than what was already present as part of usual care) required and available for the CDSS? | ||
 No (51/58) | Ref |  |
 Yes (7/58) | 0.97 (− 0.40, 2.34) | 0.17 |
Feature 44: Did the CDSS require reason for override of use/recommendations? | ||
 No (51/58) | Ref |  |
 Yes (7/58 | 0.90 (− 0.57, 2.37) | 0.23 |
Feature 52: Was there a co-intervention in the CDSS group? | ||
 No (37/58) | Ref |  |
 Yes (21/58) | 0.47 (− 0.53, 1.48) | 0.36 |
Feature 28: If the CDSS used specific functions for prioritized decision support (i.e. pop-ups), were they pilot tested or assessed in a post-study evaluation? | ||
 No (42/58) | Ref |  |
 Yes (15/58) | 0.36 (− 0.60, 1.32) | 0.46 |
 NA (1/58) |  |  |
Feature 38: If CDSS usage and performance was monitored during the study, were there strategies in place to fix any identified problems? | ||
 No (14/58) | Ref |  |
 Yes (19/58) | 0.23 (− 0.74, 1.21) | 0.64 |
 NA (25/58) |  |  |