ArticleBioMed research international2015
User Satisfaction Evaluation of the EHR4CR Query Builder: A Multisite Patient Count Cohort System.
Article in BioMed research international, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Empowering Researchers to Query Medical Data and Biospecimens by Ensuring Appropriate Usability of a Feasibility Tool: Evaluation Study.JMIR human factors · 2023Article
- Improving COVID-19 Research of University Hospitals in Germany: Formative Usability Evaluation of the CODEX Feasibility Portal.Applied clinical informatics · 2022Article
- Evaluation of Three Feasibility Tools for Identifying Patient Data and Biospecimen Availability: Comparative Usability Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2021Article
- Assessing an Electronic Health Record research platform for identification of clinical trial participants.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2021Article
- Applied Practice and Possible Leverage Points for Information Technology Support for Patient Screening in Clinical Trials: Qualitative Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2020Article
- Usability and Suitability of the Omics-Integrating Analysis Platform tranSMART for Translational Research and Education.Applied clinical informatics · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Electronic Health Records for Clinical Research (EHR4CR) project aims to develop services and technology for the leverage reuse of Electronic Health Records with the purpose of improving the efficiency of clinical research processes. A pilot program was implemented to generate evidence of the value of using the EHR4CR platform. The user acceptance of the platform is a key success factor in driving the adoption of the EHR4CR platform; thus, it was decided to evaluate the user satisfaction. In this paper, we present the results of a user satisfaction evaluation for the EHR4CR multisite patient count cohort system. This study examined the ability of testers (n = 22 and n = 16 from 5 countries) to perform three main tasks (around 20 minutes per task), after a 30-minute period of self-training. The System Usability Scale score obtained was 55.83 (SD: 15.37), indicating a moderate user satisfaction. The responses to an additional satisfaction questionnaire were positive about the design of the interface and the required procedure to design a query. Nevertheless, the most complex of the three tasks proposed in this test was rated as difficult, indicating a need to improve the system regarding complicated queries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.