Academic Journal
A Qualitative Requirements Analysis for the Representation of Clinical Guidelines.
| Τίτλος: | A Qualitative Requirements Analysis for the Representation of Clinical Guidelines. |
|---|---|
| Συγγραφείς: | Gashi B; Technical University of Munich, TUM School of Medicine and Health, Institute for AI and Informatics in Medicine (AIIM), TUM University Hospital., Schiefenhoevel F; Technical University of Munich, TUM School of Medicine and Health, Institute for AI and Informatics in Medicine (AIIM), TUM University Hospital., Boeker M; Technical University of Munich, TUM School of Medicine and Health, Institute for AI and Informatics in Medicine (AIIM), TUM University Hospital. |
| Πηγή: | Studies in health technology and informatics [Stud Health Technol Inform] 2026 Sep 17; Vol. 340, pp. 119-127. |
| Τύπος έκδοσης: | Journal Article |
| Γλώσσα: | English |
| Στοιχεία περιοδικού: | Publisher: IOS Press Country of Publication: Netherlands NLM ID: 9214582 Publication Model: Print Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1879-8365 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 09269630 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Stud Health Technol Inform Subsets: MEDLINE |
| Imprint Name(s): | Original Publication: Amsterdam ; Washington, DC : IOS Press, 1991- |
| Ιατρικοί όροι (MeSH): | Decision Support Systems, Clinical*/standards , Practice Guidelines as Topic*, Humans ; Qualitative Research ; Document Analysis |
| Περίληψη: | Introduction: Clinical Guidelines (CPGs, CGs) are mostly static, narrative documents, which may cause usability issues at the point of care. Although computable CG standards are available, major publishing portals do not publish them alongside CGs. This study aims to provide a requirements analysis to formalize and visualize CGs, based on (1) a structured analysis of CGs sampled from four major CG portals, and (2) semi-structured qualitative interviews with clinicians from different medical specialties. The study seeks to identify a consolidated set of requirements to inform future efforts in CG formalization and design of CG-based CDSSs. Methods: The structural document analysis included 20 full-version CGs obtained from AWMF (S3-level), NICE, SIGN and WHO. The extracted data covered structural features on the document and recommendation level and were synthesized descriptively. Interviews were conducted via video call (25-35 min) with 8 physicians from the Klinikum Rechts der Isar (TUM), guided by a 14-question interview guide. Participants were purposefully recruited from a range of clinical specialties and seniority levels. Whisper (OpenAI) wasused as a transcription tool, with subsequent human correction. Analysis was supported by Microsoft Copilot (Enterprise), via a structured prompt developed by the team. All outputs were reviewed by humans, with 3 quality checks applied. Results: All four portals publish CGs as static narrative documents with no computable representations, spread across different documents. Interview analysis produced 45 categories in five thematic clusters, with four of them reported consistently: outdated or conflicting versions, insufficient specificity, inadequate or missing patient-specific applicability, and evidence gaps for rare diseases. Clinician challenges correspond directly to the structural analysis' findings. 22 requirements (functional, structural and visual) were derived. Conclusion: The 22 requirements based on two independent evidence sources provide a validated foundation for CG formalization and visualization. |
| Contributed Indexing: | Keywords: Data Visualization; Decision Support Systems, Clinical; Interviews as Topic; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Qualitative Research; Systems Analysis |
| Entry Date(s): | Date Created: 20260917 Date Completed: 20260917 Latest Revision: 20260917 |
| Update Code: | 20260918 |
| DOI: | 10.3233/SHTI260993 |
| PMID: | 42752476 |
| Βάση Δεδομένων: | MEDLINE |
| ISSN: | 1879-8365 |
|---|---|
| DOI: | 10.3233/SHTI260993 |