ReviewHealth science reports2026
A Systematic Review of Factors Affecting Utilization of Decision Support Systems: The Interplay Between Technology, Users, and the Healthcare Environment.
Review in Health science reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: In the ever-evolving domain of healthcare, Decision Support Systems (DSS) stand at the forefront of technological advancement, promising to revolutionize patient care. This systematic review investigated the factors that influence the adoption of DSS, and provides important insights into their use in healthcare services. Methods: Using the PRISMA framework, this systematic review was conducted based on articles published in the time frame of 2000-2024. A systematic literature search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, ProQuest, and the Cochrane Library. The AACODS checklist was used for quality assessment of the included studies. Subsequently, a thematic analysis was conducted on the acquired data. Results: Eighty-six studies were included in the research. The included studies were deemed to bear high quality and low risk of bias. The research illuminated 11 themes and 47 sub-themes. The themes included system design and integration, user characteristics, personalization, trust, quality, utility, satisfaction and acceptability, education and awareness, involvement, settings, and ethical-legal issues. Conclusion: The study yielded comprehensive data that addressed the research questions by presenting an extensive list of factors influencing the utilization of DSS in healthcare. The perceived importance of these factors varied, as indicated by the differing frequencies with which they were cited across the included studies. This disparity in factor importance was particularly pronounced when comparing developed and developing countries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.