ArticleJournal of medical systems2015
User Interface Requirements for Web-Based Integrated Care Pathways: Evidence from the Evaluation of an Online Care Pathway Investigation Tool.
Article in Journal of medical systems, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Design and content of health facility routine data recording and reporting forms for maternal, newborn, and child health: a scoping review of literature.JAMIA open · 2026Review
- Clinical Decision Support Requirements for Ventricular Tachycardia Diagnosis Within the Frameworks of Knowledge and Practice: Survey Study.JMIR human factors · 2024Article
- Multi-method laboratory user evaluation of an actionable clinical performance information system: Implications for usability and patient safety.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2018Article
- Systematic Heuristic Evaluation of Computerized Consultation Order Templates: Clinicians' and Human Factors Engineers' Perspectives.Journal of medical systems · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Integrated care pathways (ICPs) define a chronological sequence of steps, most commonly diagnostic or treatment, to be followed in providing care for patients. Care pathways help to ensure quality standards are met and to reduce variation in practice. Although research on the computerisation of ICP progresses, there is still little knowledge on what are the requirements for designing user-friendly and usable electronic care pathways, or how users (normally health care professionals) interact with interfaces that support design, analysis and visualisation of ICPs. The purpose of the study reported in this paper was to address this gap by evaluating the usability of a novel web-based tool called COCPIT (Collaborative Online Care Pathway Investigation Tool). COCPIT supports the design, analysis and visualisation of ICPs at the population level. In order to address the aim of this study, an evaluation methodology was designed based on heuristic evaluations and a mixed method usability test. The results showed that modular visualisation and direct manipulation of information related to the design and analysis of ICPs is useful for engaging and stimulating users. However, designers should pay attention to issues related to the visibility of the system status and the match between the system and the real world, especially in relation to the display of statistical information about care pathways and the editing of clinical information within a care pathway. The paper concludes with recommendations for interface design.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26446014What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.