Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25170939›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

A clinical decision support system for integrating tuberculosis and HIV care in Kenya: a human-centered design approach.

Caricia Catalani, Eric Green, Philip Owiti, Aggrey Keny, Lameck Diero, Ada Yeung, Dennis Israelski, Paul Biondich

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing 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

45 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. Review
  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

8 authors.

Caricia CatalaniInnovative Support to Emergency, Disease, & Disaster (InSTEDD), Sunnyvale, California, United States of America; School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, California, United States of America.
Eric GreenKijani Consulting, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America; Duke University, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America.
Philip OwitiAcademic Model for the Prevention and Treatment of HIV (AMPATH), Eldoret, Kenya.
Aggrey KenyDuke University, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America.
Lameck DieroAcademic Model for the Prevention and Treatment of HIV (AMPATH), Eldoret, Kenya.
Ada YeungRegenstrief Institute, Indiana University, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States of America.
Dennis IsraelskiInnovative Support to Emergency, Disease, & Disaster (InSTEDD), Sunnyvale, California, United States of America; School of Medicine, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California, United States of America.
Paul BiondichAcademic Model for the Prevention and Treatment of HIV (AMPATH), Eldoret, Kenya; Regenstrief Institute, Indiana University, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States of America.

Funding

PEPFAR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the aim of integrating HIV and tuberculosis care in rural Kenya, a team of researchers, clinicians, and technologists used the human-centered design approach to facilitate design, development, and deployment processes of new patient-specific TB clinical decision support system for medical providers. In Kenya, approximately 1.6 million people are living with HIV and have a 20-times higher risk of dying of tuberculosis. Although tuberculosis prevention and treatment medication is widely available, proven to save lives, and prioritized by the World Health Organization, ensuring that it reaches the most vulnerable communities remains challenging. Human-centered design, used in the fields of industrial design and information technology for decades, is an approach to improving the effectiveness and impact of innovations that has been scarcely used in the health field. Using this approach, our team followed a 3-step process, involving mixed methods assessment to (1) understand the situation through the collection and analysis of site observation sessions and key informant interviews; (2) develop a new clinical decision support system through iterative prototyping, end-user engagement, and usability testing; and, (3) implement and evaluate the system across 24 clinics in rural West Kenya. Through the application of this approach, we found that human-centered design facilitated the process of digital innovation in a complex and resource-constrained context.

Indexed as

Decision Support Systems, ClinicalDelivery of Health CareHIV InfectionsHumansKenyaTuberculosisWorld Health Organization

Identifiers

PMID25170939
PMCPMC4149343

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.