Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27277278›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical systems2016

Healthcare Hackathons Provide Educational and Innovation Opportunities: A Case Study and Best Practice Recommendations.

Julie K Silver, David S Binder, Nevena Zubcevik, Ross D Zafonte

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical systems, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 83 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Julie K SilverDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Harvard Medical School, Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital, 300 1st Avenue, Charlestown, MA, 02129, USA. julie_silver@hms.harvard.edu.
David S BinderDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Harvard Medical School, Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital, 300 1st Avenue, Charlestown, MA, 02129, USA.
Nevena ZubcevikDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Harvard Medical School, Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital, 300 1st Avenue, Charlestown, MA, 02129, USA.
Ross D ZafonteDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Harvard Medical School, Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital, 300 1st Avenue, Charlestown, MA, 02129, USA.
Harvard University · USSpaulding Rehabilitation Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Physicians and other healthcare professionals are often the end users of medical innovation; however, they are rarely involved in the beginning design stages. This often results in ineffective healthcare solutions with poor adoption rates. At the early design stage, innovation would benefit from input from healthcare professionals. This report describes the first-ever rehabilitation hackathon-an interdisciplinary and competitive team event aimed at accelerating and improving healthcare solutions and providing an educational experience for participants. Hackathons are gaining traction as a way to accelerate innovation by bringing together a diverse group of interdisciplinary professionals from different industries who work collaboratively in teams and learn from each other, focus on a specific problem ("pain point"), develop a solution using design thinking techniques, pitch the solution to participants, gather fast feedback and quickly alter the prototype design ("pivoting"). 102 hackers including 19 (18.6 %) physicians and other professionals participated, and over the course of 2 days worked in teams, pitched ideas and developed design prototypes. Three awards were given for prototypes that may improve function in persons with disabilities. 43 hackers were women (42.2 %) and 59 men (57.8 %); they ranged in age from 16 to 79 years old; and, of the 75 hackers who reported their age, 63 (84 %) were less than 40 years old and 12 (16 %) were 40 years or older. This report contributes to the emerging literature on healthcare hackathons as a means of providing interdisciplinary education and training and supporting innovation.

Indexed as

Software DesignAdolescentAdultAgedComputer SecurityConfidentialityCooperative BehaviorFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansInformation SystemsInservice TrainingInterdisciplinary CommunicationMaleMiddle AgedPatient Care TeamEducationHackathonHealthcare trainingInnovationInterdisciplinaryRehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID27277278
PMCPMC4899493
OpenAlexW2414798670

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.