Skip to main content

Table 4 Sample panelist rating report depicting the distribution of panelists’ ratings and the panelist’s own rating

From: A conceptual framework and protocol for defining clinical decision support objectives applicable to medical specialties

Oncology Gaps/CDS Opportunities Compatibility Potential Impact
Gap #3: The presence of pain and its intensity are inadequately assessed or quantified in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy or radiation therapy, and pain management plans are not routinely documented.                   
Smart form that captures pain intensity and generates pain management plan based on patient preference and particular history    1   1 2 5 3      1   3 3 4 1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
      ^          ^    
Display cancer pain history with intensity levels and current/prior treatments for pain     1 2 1 1 6 1    1 2   2 3 2 2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
        ^          ^  
Order set for cancer pain medication that results in a comprehensive management plan       3 3 4 2       1 3 6 2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
       ^            ^
Pathway to guide initial selection of pain medication and to guide escalation of therapy when required       2 4 3 3     1   1 4 5 1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
      ^            ^  
Reminders to assess and to quantify pain at appropriate moments in workflow   1     1 3 6 1    1    1 6 4  
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
      ^          ^    
Overall rating      1 1 5 4 1    1    1 3 6 1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
       ^           ^  
  1. Note: The figure displays a portion of a rating report provided to Panelist #13. The distribution of all panelists’ ratings are depicted in the row directly above the rating scale. Each panelist’s own rating is indicated by a caret. For example, two panelists (including Panelist #13) assigned a rating of 6 for the compatibility of the first CDS opportunity, a smart form that captures pain intensity.