MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4410916167 · doi:10.2196/63339

Guideline-Based Clinical Decision Support Framework for Multimorbidity: Protocol for a Formulation and Testing Study

2025· article· en· W4410916167 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zijun Wang, Bingyi Wang, Hongfeng He, Jie Zhang, Yaolong Chen, Janne Estill

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Disease Management Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintProtocol (science)GuidelineComputer scienceClinical decision support systemDecision support systemMedicineMedical physicsData miningAlternative medicineWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The burden of multimorbidity is increasing globally, which complicates the use of guidelines in clinical practice and health care: practitioners may need to increasingly refer to multiple guidelines with potentially conflicting recommendations. OBJECTIVE: We aim to develop a guideline-based decision support framework for the management of patients with multimorbidity to help clinicians efficiently evaluate, select, and adapt recommendations focusing on the different comorbidities and aspects of multimorbidity. METHODS: We will conduct the project using the following steps: (1) needs assessment (searching published literature and documents on guideline use in multimorbidity care through the study initiators, and assessing the necessity of developing a comprehensive decision-making framework focusing on multimorbidity in a broad sense), (2) establishing international working groups (a coordination team, an evidence support group, and a consensus group) by leveraging existing participants' networks and inviting experts with relevant academic publications or activities, (3) conducting literature reviews of multimorbidity guidelines and original qualitative research involving interest-holders in multimorbidity care and/or guideline development to formulate an initial draft framework, (4) a consensus process including an expert survey and a consensus meeting, (5) formulating and releasing the final framework, and (6) testing the framework (collecting feedback through educating health professionals in different settings and applying the framework in practice to evaluate and improve it). We plan to complete the project within 3 years. RESULTS: The project has started in March 2024 and is due to conclude in June 2026. As of May 2025, we have finished the literature reviews and qualitative studies and are currently conducting the first round of the expert survey. CONCLUSIONS: This framework will help clinicians from all levels of health care institutions to make decisions in the management of patients with multimorbidity based on the latest available evidence, and to reduce potential health risks to their patients. One limitation of this framework is that such a broad framework may not fully fit all disease combinations or realistic situations. To reduce the degree of inapplicability, after completion of the framework, we will continue to monitor its use with regular updates as needed. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/63339.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.130
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.166
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.130
Threshold uncertainty score0.687

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1300.166
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.006
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0050.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0710.012

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.660
GPT teacher head0.713
Teacher spread0.053 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicChronic Disease Management Strategies→French-language works237,207→