IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v20y2000i2p145-159.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Design and Pilot Evaluation of a System to Develop Computer-based Site-specific Practice Guidelines from Decision Models

Author

Listed:
  • Gillian D. Sanders
  • Robert F. Nease JR
  • Douglas K. Owens

Abstract

Background. Local tailoring of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) requires experts in medicine and evidence synthesis unavailable in many practice settings. The authors' computer-based system enables developers and users to create, disseminate, and tailor CPGs, using normative decision models (DMs). Methods. ALCHEMIST, a web-based system, analyzes a DM, creates a CPG in the form of an annotated algorithm, and displays for the guideline user the optimal strategy. ALCHEMIST'S interface enables remote users to tailor the guideline by changing underlying input variables and observing the new annotated algorithm that is developed automatically. In a pilot evaluation of the system, a DM was used to evaluate strategies for staging non-small-cell lung cancer. Subjects (n = 15) compared the automatically created CPG with published guidelines for this staging and critiqued both using a previously developed instrument to rate the CPGs' usability, accountability, and accuracy on a scale of 0 (worst) to 2 (best), with higher scores reflecting higher quality. Results. The mean overall score for the ALCHEMIST CPG was 1.502, compared with the published-CPG score of 0.987 (p = 0.002). The ALCHEMIST CPG scores for usability, accountability, and accuracy were 1.683, 1.393, and 1.430, respectively; the published CPG scores were 1.192, 0.941, and 0.830 (each comparison p

Suggested Citation

  • Gillian D. Sanders & Robert F. Nease JR & Douglas K. Owens, 2000. "Design and Pilot Evaluation of a System to Develop Computer-based Site-specific Practice Guidelines from Decision Models," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 20(2), pages 145-159, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:20:y:2000:i:2:p:145-159
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X0002000201
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X0002000201
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X0002000201?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:20:y:2000:i:2:p:145-159. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.