Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21911758›Full record

ArticleAnnals of family medicine

A diabetes dashboard and physician efficiency and accuracy in accessing data needed for high-quality diabetes care.

Richelle J Koopman, Karl M Kochendorfer, Joi L Moore, David R Mehr, Douglas S Wakefield, Borchuluun Yadamsuren, Jared S Coberly, Robin L Kruse, Bonnie J Wakefield, Jeffery L Belden

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of family medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 64 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
64citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

64 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Richelle J KoopmanCurtis W. and Ann H. Long Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Missouri, School of Medicine, Columbia, Missouri 65212, USA. koopmanr@health.missouri.edu
Karl M Kochendorfer
Joi L Moore
David R Mehr
Douglas S Wakefield
Borchuluun Yadamsuren
Jared S Coberly
Robin L Kruse
Bonnie J Wakefield
Jeffery L Belden

Funding

Using HIT to Improve Ambulatory Chronic Disease CareR18HS017035 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI-COLUMBIA · PI MEHR, DAVID R · 2007 to 2009
$1.2M
AHRQ HHS R18 HS017035AHRQ HHS R18HS017035
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe compared use of a new diabetes dashboard screen with use of a conventional approach of viewing multiple electronic health record (EHR) screens to find data needed for ambulatory diabetes care.

methodsWe performed a usability study, including a quantitative time study and qualitative analysis of information-seeking behaviors. While being recorded with Morae Recorder software and "think-aloud" interview methods, 10 primary care physicians first searched their EHR for 10 diabetes data elements using a conventional approach for a simulated patient, and then using a new diabetes dashboard for another. We measured time, number of mouse clicks, and accuracy. Two coders analyzed think-aloud and interview data using grounded theory methodology.

resultsThe mean time needed to find all data elements was 5.5 minutes using the conventional approach vs 1.3 minutes using the diabetes dashboard (P <.001). Physicians correctly identified 94% of the data requested using the conventional method, vs 100% with the dashboard (P <.01). The mean number of mouse clicks was 60 for conventional searching vs 3 clicks with the diabetes dashboard (P <.001). A common theme was that in everyday practice, if physicians had to spend too much time searching for data, they would either continue without it or order a test again.

conclusionsUsing a patient-specific diabetes dashboard improves both the efficiency and accuracy of acquiring data needed for high-quality diabetes care. Usability analysis tools can provide important insights into the value of optimizing physician use of health information technologies.

Indexed as

Data DisplayElectronic Health RecordsUser-Computer InterfaceAdultAttitude of Health PersonnelDiabetes MellitusEfficiencyFemaleHealth Status IndicatorsHumansInformation Seeking BehaviorMaleMiddle AgedPhysicians, Primary CareTime and Motion StudiesTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID21911758
PMCPMC3185474

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.