The paper, written by leading specialists, outlines how the healthcare system needs to change so that it can provide a better service for patients. The clinical specialists outline how common comorbidities can interact with other conditions and the risks associated with these interactions.

This evaluation showed how healthcare professionals used BMJ Best Practice to improve their clinical decision making at the point-of-care. In this evaluation healthcare professionals used BMJ Best Practice to improve care in differential diagnosis, management and follow up.

The CDSS [clinical decision support systems] integrated with BMJ Best Practice improved the accuracy of clinicians’ diagnoses. Shorter confirmed diagnosis times and hospitalization days were also found to be associated with CDSS implementation in retrospective real-world studies.

This evaluation showed that physicians saw the most value in BMJ Best Practice in helping them to improve their practice. They most appreciated clinically relevant content that was based on their needs, such as practical areas of history taking, diagnosis, differential diagnosis, investigation, management, and referral.

This paper shows how BMJ Best Practice was used to support healthcare professional education in infectious diseases. Analysis of use of the resource suggests that healthcare professionals most appreciated the practical and actionable content on diagnosis and management.

This study examined 11 diagnostic decision support tools at the point of care, using an evaluation instrument that included 6 categories: general information, content, quality control, search, clinical results and other features. BMJ Best Practice ranked highest overall in the 6 clinical case scenarios used.

This paper shows BMJ Best Practice’s role in programs to strengthen health systems. Outcome drivers include the provision of content in the appropriate languages, overcoming technology barriers, linking the resources to CPD programs or existing curricula, strategic engagement of different types of healthcare professionals, and due consideration to sustainability and cost-effectiveness.

This study evaluated the quality, rigor and content of evidence-based Practice Point-of-Care Resources. It found that BMJ Best Practice was in the upper quartile of EBP point-of-care providers. BMJ Best Practice achieved maximum scores for authorship, peer review, transparency and independence. It also achieved maximum scores for literature search/surveillance, method of critical appraisal and type of evidence used.

This study looked at web-based point-of-care information summaries. BMJ Best Practice received the maximum scores for editorial quality, evidence-based methodology, authorship, reviewing, updating, transparency of conflicts of interest and independence. BMJ Best Practice also received maximum scores for literature search/literature surveillance, critical appraisal, formal grading of evidence and citation of expert opinion.