Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21828224›Full record

ReviewJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA

Review of health information technology usability study methodologies.

Po-Yin Yen, Suzanne Bakken

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review 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 192 papers, 14 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
192citing papers in PubMed, 14 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

192 citing papers in PubMed, 14 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. A systematic review of the impact of health information technology on nurses' time.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2020
    Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. An appraisal of published usability evaluations of electronic health records via systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2017
    Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Guideline
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

132 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors.

Po-Yin YenDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210, USA. po-yin.yen@osumc.edu
Suzanne Bakken

Funding

Self-Management, Biobehavioral and Informatics CoreP30NR010677 · NINR · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI BAKKEN, SUZANNE · 2007 to 2011
$2.7M
NINR NIH HHS P30 NR010677NINR NIH HHS P30NR010677
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Usability factors are a major obstacle to health information technology (IT) adoption. The purpose of this paper is to review and categorize health IT usability study methods and to provide practical guidance on health IT usability evaluation. 2025 references were initially retrieved from the Medline database from 2003 to 2009 that evaluated health IT used by clinicians. Titles and abstracts were first reviewed for inclusion. Full-text articles were then examined to identify final eligibility studies. 629 studies were categorized into the five stages of an integrated usability specification and evaluation framework that was based on a usability model and the system development life cycle (SDLC)-associated stages of evaluation. Theoretical and methodological aspects of 319 studies were extracted in greater detail and studies that focused on system validation (SDLC stage 2) were not assessed further. The number of studies by stage was: stage 1, task-based or user-task interaction, n=42; stage 2, system-task interaction, n=310; stage 3, user-task-system interaction, n=69; stage 4, user-task-system-environment interaction, n=54; and stage 5, user-task-system-environment interaction in routine use, n=199. The studies applied a variety of quantitative and qualitative approaches. Methodological issues included lack of theoretical framework/model, lack of details regarding qualitative study approaches, single evaluation focus, environmental factors not evaluated in the early stages, and guideline adherence as the primary outcome for decision support system evaluations. Based on the findings, a three-level stratified view of health IT usability evaluation is proposed and methodological guidance is offered based upon the type of interaction that is of primary interest in the evaluation.

Indexed as

Medical InformaticsUser-Computer InterfaceHumansModels, TheoreticalResearch DesignTechnology Assessment, Biomedical

Identifiers

PMID21828224
PMCPMC3341772

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.