Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26293852›Full record

ReviewYearbook of medical informatics2015

Human Factors and Ergonomics in the Design of Health Information Technology: Trends and Progress in 2014.

S Pelayo, Ms Ong

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Yearbook of medical informatics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
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.

S PelayoSylvia Pelayo, INSERM CIC-IT 1403, Université Lille 2, CHRU de Lille, Lille, France, E-mail: sylvia.pelayo@univ-lille2.fr.
Ms Ong

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo summarize significant contributions to the research on human factors and organizational issues in medical informatics.

methodsAn extensive search using PubMed/Medline and Web of Science® was conducted to identify the scientific contributions, published in 2014, to human factors and organizational issues in medical informatics, with a focus on health information technology (HIT) usability. The selection process comprised three steps: (i) 15 candidate best papers were selected by the two section editors, (ii) external reviewers from a pool of international experts reviewed each candidate best paper, and (iii) the final selection of three best papers was made by the editorial board of the IMIA Yearbook.

resultsNoteworthy papers published in 2014 describe an efficient, easy to implement, and useful process for detecting and mitigating human factors and ergonomics (HFE) issues of HIT. They contribute to promote the HFE approach with interventions based on rigorous and well-conducted methods when designing and implementing HIT.

conclusionThe application of HFE in the design and implementation of HIT remains limited, and the impact of incorporating HFE principles on patient safety is understudied. Future works should be conducted to advance this field of research, so that the safety and quality of patient care are not compromised by the increasing adoption of HIT.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsEquipment Failure AnalysisErgonomicsUser-Computer InterfaceHumansMedical InformaticsMedication ErrorsPatient Safetyhealth information technologyHuman factorspatient safety

Identifiers

PMID26293852
PMCPMC4587043

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.