Like committees which consists of a group of persons to which some matters are assigned this is an excellent medium of discussion, education and communication which can be recommended for corrective advice ideas and opinions. This process will generate more information, resources of several individual will bring more inputs into the decision making process. Opportunities should be opened or more approaches and alternatives should be considered which will lead to increase in acceptance of a solution by a wide majority. This makes me believe that the reason why many decision fail after the final choice has been made is that people do no accept the solution. Group members who participated in making a decision are likely to enthusiastically support a solution to be made and encourage others to support it. Frank exchange of opinions, giving of suggestions and ideas to people’s contributions, corporation and coordination should be encouraged. This gives it a participative decision outlook because it encourages constructive criticism. In the long run quality decisions are made. However DSS may suffer from a number of drawbacks: decision requires laborious discussion and there are very slow hence time consuming. The decision may not be realistic as they are taken by majority but not specialized knowledge. Like committees because of several members they might be expensive to maintain, like groups which have confirmative pressures within themselves, some people can be forced to conform to particular decisions hence preventing the DSS coming up with the best solutions. There maybe a desire for some members to be accepted and considered to be an asset to the DSS. Individual can dominate others for instance by influencing them to come with a different decision. Individuals suffer from ambiguous responsibility i.e. in an individual decision it is clear who is accountable for the final outcome. Therefore, the responsibility of any single individual is watered down. Complex issues require complex decisions; the system does not address this. Evaluating simple reminder system seems to be easy since there are quality standard decisions, Decision support system developers and users have come up with a way to determine evaluations of performance and impact. It becomes difficult to evaluate a system when it generates complex output. According to the article the most published evaluations concern DSSs which produce simple output and it becomes difficult to evaluate them for they use one-word device. In the article they are developing a DSS with a more complex operation; Design-a-Trial the user enters information of their planned research where they use an interface with multiple adaptive forms. The software produces feedback using the natural language generation routines and assembles the information entered into a draft protocol in the form of critical commenting on the statistical rules and feasibility. We can also see that decision from assessment can be made independently from the design team, while the developers produce their software blind to the details of the assessment tool, well trained judges with special knowledge and skills could prepare the task, choosing or designing the composite measure while blind to the details of the DSS it end up being a wrong way of duplicating labor. In other word we can also see that Evaluation is seen as having negative impact on the progress of Clinical information technology this is brought about by the interpreting the work poorly, not doing work carefully and in an organize manner and not asking and phr