This clinical trial focuses on testing the efficacy of different digital interventions to promote re-engagement in cancer-related long-term follow-up care for adolescent and young adult (AYA) survivors of childhood cancer.
Clinical decision support (CDS) tools can 'nudge' clinicians to make the best decisions easy. Although required by "meaningful use" regulations, more than 40% of CDS lead to no change and the remaining lead to improvements that are modest at best. This is because CDS tools often ignore contextual factors and present irrelevant information. Although many tools have undergone patient-specific optimization, 'traditional CDS' are rarely clinician-specific. For example, a traditional CDS tool for beta blockers and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) addresses common prescribing misconceptions by stating asthma is not a contraindication and providing a safe threshold for blood pressure. For clinicians without these misconceptions, these statements are irrelevant and distract from key information. A 'personalized CDS' would evaluate clinician past prescribing patterns to determine whether prescribing misconceptions might exist and then conditionally present information to address those misconceptions. The objective of this research is to create personalized clinician-specific CDS that overcome shortcomings of traditional CDS. The central hypothesis is a personalized CDS that minimizes irrelevant information will lead to a higher rate of prescribing guideline-directed management and therapy (GDMT) for HFrEF compared to a traditional CDS.
New Solutions to Support Evidence-based Prescribing for Heart Failure
Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.
| Inclusion Criteria | Exclusion Criteria |
|---|---|
|
|
Sponsor: University of Colorado, Denver
These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.