Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29317386›Full record

ArticleJMIR human factors2018

The Perceived Ease of Use and Usefulness of Loop: Evaluation and Content Analysis of a Web-Based Clinical Collaboration System.

Allison M Kurahashi, Jennifer N Stinson, Margaret van Wyk, Stephanie Luca, Trevor Jamieson, Peter Weinstein, Joseph A Cafazzo, Bhadra Lokuge, Eyal Cohen, Adam Rapoport and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR human factors, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. The efficiency and effectiveness of surgery information systems in Iran.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2020
    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

11 authors.

Allison M KurahashiThe Temmy Latner Centre for Palliative Care, Sinai Health System, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5109-4121
Jennifer N StinsonChild Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9969-8052
Margaret van WykChild Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8073-7322
Stephanie LucaChild Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1057-1013
Trevor JamiesonDivision of General Internal Medicine, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1050-3918
Peter WeinsteinHealthcare Human Factors, Techna Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0016-8204
Joseph A CafazzoHealthcare Human Factors, Techna Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3114-4440
Bhadra LokugeThe Temmy Latner Centre for Palliative Care, Sinai Health System, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7245-6769
Eyal CohenChild Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0112-7188
Adam RapoportDepartment of Paediatrics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5090-8987
Amna HusainThe Temmy Latner Centre for Palliative Care, Sinai Health System, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8638-3943

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatients with complex health care needs require the expertise of many health care providers. Communication, collaboration, and patient-centered care positively impact care quality and patient outcomes. Few technologies exist that facilitate collaboration between providers across settings of care and also engage the patient. We developed a Web-based clinical collaboration system, Loop, to address this gap. The likelihood of a technological system's uptake is associated with its perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness. We engaged stakeholders in the conceptualization and development of Loop in an effort to maximize its intuitiveness and utility.

objectiveThis study aimed to report end users' perceptions about the ease of use and usefulness of Loop captured during usability tests of Loop.

methodsParticipants represented three user types (patients, caregivers, and health care providers) recruited from three populations (adults with cancer, adolescents and young adults with cancer, and children with medical complexity). We conducted usability testing over three iterative cycles of testing and development in both laboratory-based and off-site environments. We performed a content analysis of usability testing transcripts to summarize and describe participant perceptions about the ease of use and usefulness of Loop.

resultsParticipants enjoyed testing Loop and were able to use the core functions-composing, posting, and reading messages-with little difficulty. They had difficulty interpreting certain visual cues and design elements or the purpose of some features. This difficulty negatively impacted perceived ease of use but was primarily limited to auxiliary features. Participants predicted that Loop could improve the efficiency and effectiveness of communication between care team members; however, this perceived usefulness could be compromised by disruptions to personal workflow such as additional time or task requirements.

conclusionsLoop was perceived to have value as a collaboration system; however, usability testing findings indicate that some design and functional elements need to be addressed to improve ease of use. Additionally, participant concerns highlight the need to consider how a system can be implemented so as to minimize impact on workflow and optimize usefulness.

Indexed as

chronic diseasecommunicationcontinuity of patient carehealth communicationinterdisciplinary communicationinternet communication toolsinventionspatient care teampatient-centered carepatient participationusability testing

Identifiers

PMID29317386
PMCPMC5780614

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.