Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25988187›Full record

ArticleEGEMS (Washington, DC)2015

Integrating Patient-Reported Outcomes into Spine Surgical Care through Visual Dashboards: Lessons Learned from Human-Centered Design.

Andrea L Hartzler, Shomir Chaudhuri, Brett C Fey, David R Flum, Danielle Lavallee

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EGEMS (Washington, DC), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Systematic review and narrative synthesis of computerized audit and feedback systems in healthcare.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Engaging veteran stakeholders to identify patient-centred research priorities for optimizing implementation of lung cancer screening.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Patient and clinician perspectives on a patient-facing dashboard that visualizes patient reported outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020
    Article
  18. Capturing the patient voice: implementing patient-reported outcomes across the health system.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2020
    Article
  19. Advancing the use of patient-reported outcomes in practice: understanding challenges, opportunities, and the potential of health information technology.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2019
    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

5 authors.

Andrea L HartzlerGroup Health Research Institute.
Shomir ChaudhuriUniversity of Washington.
Brett C FeyUniversity of Washington.
David R FlumUniversity of Washington.
Danielle LavalleeUniversity of Washington.

Funding

University of Washington Biomedical Informatics and Data Science Research Training ProgramT15LM007442 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI JOHN H. GENNARI, Andrea L. Hartzler · 2002 to 2026
$19.6M
Surgical Care and Outcomes Assessment Program Comparative Effectiveness ResearchR01HS020025 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI FLUM, DAVID R · 2010 to 2010
$10.8M
AHRQ HHS R01 HS020025NLM NIH HHS T15 LM007442
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe collection of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) draws attention to issues of importance to patients-physical function and quality of life. The integration of PRO data into clinical decisions and discussions with patients requires thoughtful design of user-friendly interfaces that consider user experience and present data in personalized ways to enhance patient care. Whereas most prior work on PROs focuses on capturing data from patients, little research details how to design effective user interfaces that facilitate use of this data in clinical practice. We share lessons learned from engaging health care professionals to inform design of visual dashboards, an emerging type of health information technology (HIT).

methodsWe employed human-centered design (HCD) methods to create visual displays of PROs to support patient care and quality improvement. HCD aims to optimize the design of interactive systems through iterative input from representative users who are likely to use the system in the future. Through three major steps, we engaged health care professionals in targeted, iterative design activities to inform the development of a PRO Dashboard that visually displays patient-reported pain and disability outcomes following spine surgery.

findingsDesign activities to engage health care administrators, providers, and staff guided our work from design concept to specifications for dashboard implementation. Stakeholder feedback from these health care professionals shaped user interface design features, including predefined overviews that illustrate at-a-glance trends and quarterly snapshots, granular data filters that enable users to dive into detailed PRO analytics, and user-defined views to share and reuse. Feedback also revealed important considerations for quality indicators and privacy-preserving sharing and use of PROs.

conclusionOur work illustrates a range of engagement methods guided by human-centered principles and design recommendations for optimizing PRO Dashboards for patient care and quality improvement. Engaging health care professionals as stakeholders is a critical step toward the design of user-friendly HIT that is accepted, usable, and has the potential to enhance quality of care and patient outcomes.

Indexed as

Data Use and QualityEngagementFormative evaluationHealth Information TechnologyHuman-centered designHuman Computer Interaction (HCI)Information displayLearning Health SystemPatient-Centered Outcomes Research (PCOR)Patient-reported outcomesVisualization

Identifiers

PMID25988187
PMCPMC4431498

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.