Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20595309›Full record

Trial reportJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA

The design and evaluation of a graphical display for laboratory data.

David T Bauer, Stephanie Guerlain, Patrick J Brown

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

40 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Impact of integrated graphical display on expert and novice diagnostic performance in critical care.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2020
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

David T BauerUniversity of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, USA.
Stephanie Guerlain
Patrick J Brown

Funding

Systems Engineering Focus on Clinical InformaticsT15LM009462 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA · PI BASS, ELLEN J · 2007 to 2012
$3.6M
NLM NIH HHS T15 LM009462NLM NIH HHS T15LM009462
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveAdvances in healthcare information technology have provided opportunities to present data in new, more effective ways. In this study, we designed a laboratory display that features small, data-dense graphics called sparklines, which have recently been promoted as effective representations of medical data but have not been well studied. The effect of this novel display on physicians' interpretation of data was investigated.

designTwelve physicians talked aloud as they assessed laboratory data from four patients in a pediatric intensive care unit with the graph display and with a conventional table display. MEASUREMENTS: Verbalizations were coded based on the abnormal values and trends identified for each lab variable. The correspondence of interpretations of variables in each display was evaluated, and patterns were investigated across participants. Assessment time was also analyzed.

resultsPhysicians completed assessments significantly faster with the graphical display (3.6 min vs 4.4 min, p=0.042). When compared across displays, 37% of interpretations did not match. Graphs were more useful when the visual cues in tables did not provide trend information, while slightly abnormal values were easier to identify with tables.

conclusionsData presentation format can affect how physicians interpret laboratory data. Graphic displays have several advantages over numeric displays but are not always optimal. User, task and data characteristics should be considered when designing information displays.

Indexed as

Clinical Laboratory Information SystemsComputer GraphicsTask Performance and AnalysisUser-Computer InterfaceHumansIntensive Care Units, PediatricPhysiciansTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID20595309
PMCPMC2995657

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.