Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30041647›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2018

Evidence-based usability design principles for medication alerting systems.

Romaric Marcilly, Elske Ammenwerth, Erin Roehrer, Julie Niès, Marie-Catherine Beuscart-Zéphir

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Human Factors and Sociotechnical Issues.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2019
    Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

5 authors.

Romaric MarcillyUniv. Lille, INSERM, CHU Lille, CIC-IT / Evalab 1403 - Centre d'Investigation clinique, EA 2694, F-59000 Lille, France, Maison Régionale de la Recherche Clinique, 6 rue du professeur Laguesse, 59000, Lille, France. romaric.marcilly@univ-lille.fr.ORCID 0000-0002-7077-7267
Elske AmmenwerthInstitute of Medical Informatics, UMIT - University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, 6060, Hall in Tirol, Austria.
Erin RoehrereHealth Services Research Group, School of Engineering and ICT, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 87, Hobart, Tasmania, 7001, Australia.
Julie NièsGeneral Electric Healthcare Partners, 92772, Boulogne Billancourt cedex, France.
Marie-Catherine Beuscart-ZéphirUniv. Lille, INSERM, CHU Lille, CIC-IT / Evalab 1403 - Centre d'Investigation clinique, EA 2694, F-59000 Lille, France, Maison Régionale de la Recherche Clinique, 6 rue du professeur Laguesse, 59000, Lille, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUsability flaws in medication alerting systems may have a negative impact on clinical use and patient safety. In order to prevent the release of alerting systems that contain such flaws, it is necessary to provide designers and evaluators with evidence-based usability design principles. The objective of the present study was to develop a comprehensive, structured list of evidence-based usability design principles for medication alerting systems.

methodsNine sets of design principles for medication alerting systems were analyzed, summarized, and structured. We then matched the summarized principles with a list of usability flaws in order to determine the level of underlying evidence.

resultsFifty-eight principles were summarized from the literature and two additional principles were defined, so that each flaw was matched with a principle. We organized the 60 summarized usability design principles into 6 meta-principles, 38 principles, and 16 sub-principles. Only 15 principles were not matched with a usability flaw. The 6 meta-principles respectively covered the improvement of the signal-to-noise ratio, the support for collaborative working, the fit with a clinician's workflow, the data display, the transparency of the alerting system, and the actionable tools to be provided within an alert.

conclusionsIt is possible to develop an evidence-based, structured, comprehensive list of usability design principles that are specific to medication alerting systems and are illustrated by the corresponding usability flaws. This list represents an improvement over the current literature. Each principle is now associated with the best available evidence of its violation. This knowledge may help to improve the usability of medication alerting systems and, ultimately, decrease the harmful consequences of the systems' usability flaws.

Indexed as

Evidence-Based PracticeMedical Order Entry SystemsSoftware DesignHumansAlerting systemDecision supportDesignHuman engineeringUsability

Identifiers

PMID30041647
PMCPMC6057098

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.