ArticleImplementation science : IS2010
Usability evaluation of a clinical decision support tool for osteoporosis disease management.
Article in Implementation science : IS, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
33 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Complex interventions can increase osteoporosis investigations and treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2018Pooled it
- A systematic review of mixed methods research on human factors and ergonomics in health care.Applied ergonomics · 2015Pooled it
- Comparative Usability Evaluation of Two Hospital Information Systems: A Mixed-Methods Study in an Iranian Teaching Hospital.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Support needs assessment tool for people with disability wanting to participate in sport and exercise (SNAT-SE): Usability and acceptability testing.JSAMS plus · 2025Article
- Applications of social marketing for implementation science: a scoping review.Implementation science : IS · 2025Article
- The persian version of mhealth app usability questionnaire (MAUQ) for patients: a psychometric assessment study.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- Evaluation and randomised controlled trial of home urinalysis testing in patients with SLE at elevated risk for developing lupus nephritis: a study protocol.Lupus science & medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- Real-Time User Feedback to Support Clinical Decision Support System Improvement.Applied clinical informatics · 2022Article
- The impact of users' cognitive function on evaluator perceptions of usability.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Web-Based Tool (FH Family Share) to Increase Uptake of Cascade Testing for Familial Hypercholesterolemia: Development and Evaluation.JMIR human factors · 2022Article
- Comparison of Methods for Alcohol and Drug Screening in Primary Care Clinics.JAMA network open · 2021Article
- User-centered and theory-based design of a professional training program on shared decision-making with older adults living with neurocognitive disorders: a mixed-methods study.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2021Article
- Primary Care Pre-Visit Electronic Patient Questionnaire for Asthma: Uptake Analysis and Predictor Modeling.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- An Implementation Science Framework to Develop a Clinical Decision Support Tool for Familial Hypercholesterolemia.Journal of personalized medicine · 2020Article
- Improving Team-Based Decision Making Using Data Analytics and Informatics: Protocol for a Collaborative Decision Support Design.JMIR research protocols · 2019Article
- Learning from usability testing of an arts-based knowledge translation tool for parents of a child with asthma.Nursing open · 2019Article
- Live Usability Testing of Two Complex Clinical Decision Support Tools: Observational Study.JMIR human factors · 2019Article
- Enhancing the uptake of systematic reviews of effects: what is the best format for health care managers and policy-makers? A mixed-methods study.Implementation science : IS · 2018Review
- Telemonitoring and Protocolized Case Management for Hypertensive Community-Dwelling Seniors With Diabetes: Protocol of the TECHNOMED Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOsteoporosis affects over 200 million people worldwide at a high cost to healthcare systems. Although guidelines are available, patients are not receiving appropriate diagnostic testing or treatment. Findings from a systematic review of osteoporosis interventions and a series of focus groups were used to develop a functional multifaceted tool that can support clinical decision-making in osteoporosis disease management at the point of care. The objective of our study was to assess how well the prototype met functional goals and usability needs.
methodsWe conducted a usability study for each component of the tool--the Best Practice Recommendation Prompt (BestPROMPT), the Risk Assessment Questionnaire (RAQ), and the Customised Osteoporosis Education (COPE) sheet--using the framework described by Kushniruk and Patel. All studies consisted of one-on-one sessions with a moderator using a standardised worksheet. Sessions were audio- and video-taped and transcribed verbatim. Data analysis consisted of a combination of qualitative and quantitative analyses.
resultsIn study 1, physicians liked that the BestPROMPT can provide customised recommendations based on risk factors identified from the RAQ. Barriers included lack of time to use the tool, the need to alter clinic workflow to enable point-of-care use, and that the tool may disrupt the real reason for the visit. In study 2, patients completed the RAQ in a mean of 6 minutes, 35 seconds. Of the 42 critical incidents, 60% were navigational and most occurred when the first nine participants were using the stylus pen; no critical incidents were observed with the last six participants that used the touch screen. Patients thought that the RAQ questions were easy to read and understand, but they found it difficult to initiate the questionnaire. Suggestions for improvement included improving aspects of the interface and navigation. The results of study 3 showed that most patients were able to understand and describe sections of the COPE sheet, and all considered discussing the information with their physicians. Suggestions for improvement included simplifying the language and improving the layout.
conclusionsFindings from the three studies informed changes to the tool and confirmed the importance of usability testing on all end users to reduce errors, and as an important step in the development process of knowledge translation interventions.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.