Overcoming Barriers to Decision Support Systems in Healthcare, Education, and Public Policy: Toward Inclusive and Ethical Implementation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61978/data.v3i3.707Keywords:
Decision Support Systems, Data-Driven Decision-Making, Managerial Strategies, Public Policy, Healthcare Analytics, Supply Chain Optimization, Adaptive Learning TechnologiesAbstract
Decision Support Systems (DSS) are increasingly recognized as vital tools for enhancing organizational decision-making across sectors. This narrative review synthesizes empirical evidence on the effectiveness, challenges, and strategic implications of DSS implementation, focusing on healthcare, education, supply chain, and public policy sectors. By examining these areas, the study highlights sector-specific dynamics and barriers to adoption. Using a systematic narrative approach, the study draws from literature indexed in Scopus, Google Scholar, and Web of Science, applying keyword-based searches and inclusion criteria to select peer-reviewed empirical and theoretical studies published within the last decade. The review finds, for example, that DSS in healthcare reduce sepsis-related mortality by enabling early detection, while in education, DSS support adaptive learning systems that align teaching with student performance data. In supply chains, DSS improve delivery times by up to 30%, and in public policy, they facilitate scenario-based analysis for transparent decision-making. However, systemic barriers such as infrastructure limitations, low digital literacy, and cultural resistance persist, especially in public sector adoption. These barriers impede the full realization of DSS potential and necessitate multi-level interventions. Integration of DSS has shown to not only optimize operational performance but also inform long-term strategic planning and policy development. The discussion underscores the importance of adaptive DSS models, user-centric design, and ethical governance in maximizing system effectiveness. The study concludes that while DSS offer transformative potential, their success depends on addressing institutional readiness and embedding ethical, inclusive frameworks. Future research should prioritize longitudinal studies on DSS adoption in healthcare and education, cross-country comparisons of supply chain DSS, and investigation into governance frameworks that ensure ethical use in public policy
References
Adjerid, I., Ayvaci, M., & Özer, Ö. (2023). Value of algorithm-enabled process innovation: the case of sepsis. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 25(4), 1545–1566. https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2023.1226 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2023.1226
Atinga, R., Dery, S., Katongole, S., & Aikins, M. (2020). Capacity for optimal performance of healthcare supply chain functions: competency, structural and resource gaps in the northern region of Ghana. Journal of Health Organization and Management, 34(8), 899–914. https://doi.org/10.1108/jhom-09-2019-0283 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JHOM-09-2019-0283
Bartolacci, F., Gobbo, R., & Soverchia, M. (2024). Improving public services’ performance measurement systems: applying data envelopment analysis in the big and open data context. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 38(3), 313–331. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijpsm-06-2023-0186 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-06-2023-0186
Braithwaite, J., Westbrook, J., Coiera, E., Runciman, W., Day, R., Hillman, K., … & Herkes, J. (2017). A systems science perspective on the capacity for change in public hospitals. Israel Journal of Health Policy Research, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13584-017-0143-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13584-017-0143-6
Caro, F., & Cuenca, A. (2023). Believing in analytics: managers’ adherence to price recommendations from a DSS. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 25(2), 524–542. https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2022.1166 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2022.1166
Diachkova, A., & Kulkova, L. (2020). Organizational and managerial solutions for online (distance) interaction in the educational process at the school. Perspectives of Science and Education, 47(5), 429–439. https://doi.org/10.32744/pse.2020.5.30 DOI: https://doi.org/10.32744/pse.2020.5.30
Domínguez, M., Pinto, L., & Harzing, A. (2021). No room at the top? A system dynamics view of the recursive consequences of women's underrepresentation in international assignments. Journal of Global Mobility, 9(3), 361–381. https://doi.org/10.1108/jgm-04-2021-0047 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JGM-04-2021-0047
Echefaj, K., Charkaoui, A., Cherrafi, A., Garza‐Reyes, J., Khan, S., & Benabdellah, A. (2023). Sustainable and resilient supplier selection in the context of circular economy: an ontology-based model. Management of Environmental Quality, 34(5), 1461–1489. https://doi.org/10.1108/meq-02-2023-0037 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-02-2023-0037
Erasmus, E., Gilson, L., Govender, V., & Nkosi, M. (2017). Organisational culture and trust as influences over the implementation of equity-oriented policy in two South African case study hospitals. International Journal for Equity in Health, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-017-0659-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-017-0659-y
Frej, E., Roselli, L., Alberti, A., Britto, M., Júnior, E., Ferreira, R., … & Almeida, A. (2023). Collaborative decision model for allocating intensive care units beds with scarce resources in health systems: a portfolio based approach under expected utility theory and Bayesian decision analysis. Mathematics, 11(3), 659. https://doi.org/10.3390/math11030659 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/math11030659
Frias, K., Ghosh, M., Janakiraman, N., Duhan, D., & Lusch, R. (2023). A theory of product-form strategy: when to market know-how, components, or systems? Journal of Marketing, 87(5), 679–697. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222429221149437 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00222429221149437
Hristov, I., & Appolloni, A. (2021). Stakeholders' engagement in the business strategy as a key driver to increase companies' performance: evidence from managerial and stakeholders' practices. Business Strategy and the Environment, 31(4), 1488–1503. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2965 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2965
Leidner, C., Vennedey, V., Hillen, H., Ansmann, L., Stock, S., Kuntz, L., … & Hower, K. (2021). Implementation of patient-centred care: which system-level determinants matter from a decision maker’s perspective? Results from a qualitative interview study across various health and social care organisations. BMJ Open, 11(9), e050054. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050054 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050054
Lisi, I. (2015). Translating environmental motivations into performance: the role of environmental performance measurement systems. Management Accounting Research, 29, 27–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2015.06.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2015.06.001
Mor, R., Bhardwaj, A., & Singh, S. (2018). Benchmarking the interactions among performance indicators in dairy supply chain. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 25(9), 3858–3881. https://doi.org/10.1108/bij-09-2017-0254 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-09-2017-0254
Mora, M., Fen, W., Gómez, J., Rainsinghani, M., & Shevchenko, V. (2018). Decision-making support systems in quality management of higher education institutions, 1988–2012. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-5643-5.ch088 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-5643-5.ch088
Narkhov, D., Нархова, Е., & Шкурин, Д. (2021). Dynamics of educational activity of students under the influence of digitalisation. The Education and Science Journal, 23(8), 147–188. https://doi.org/10.17853/1994-5639-2021-8-147-188 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17853/1994-5639-2021-8-147-188
Remondino, M. (2018). Information technology in healthcare: HHC-MOTES, a novel set of metrics to analyse IT sustainability in different areas. Sustainability, 10(8), 2721. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10082721 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su10082721
Scherm, A., Hirsch, B., Sohn, M., & Maske, M. (2022). How to de-bias investment judgements–unpacking bias and possible remedies in a capital investment context. Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 23(5), 1005–1023. https://doi.org/10.1108/jaar-01-2021-0005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JAAR-01-2021-0005
Tan, M., Patel, B., Roughead, E., Ward, M., Reuter, S., Roberts, G., … & Andrade, A. (2023). Opportunities for clinical decision support targeting medication safety in remote primary care management of chronic kidney disease: a qualitative study in Northern Australia. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 31(5), 656–666. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633x231204545 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633X231204545
Tyrychtr, J., Ulman, M., & Vostrovský, V. (2015). Evaluation of the state of the business intelligence among small Czech farms. Agricultural Economics (Zemědělská Ekonomika), 61(2), 63–71. https://doi.org/10.17221/108/2014-agricecon DOI: https://doi.org/10.17221/108/2014-AGRICECON
Vanegas-López, J., Rojas, J., López-Cadavid, D., & Mathew, M. (2020). International market selection: an application of hybrid multi-criteria decision-making technique in the textile sector. Review of International Business and Strategy, 31(1), 127–150. https://doi.org/10.1108/ribs-07-2020-0088 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/RIBS-07-2020-0088
Yurchenko, I., Бандурин, М., & Бандурина, И. (2021). Modernization of reclamation agriculture management systems. Bio Web of Conferences, 37, 00026. https://doi.org/10.1051/bioconf/20213700026 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/bioconf/20213700026
